STROBE扩展：内容定性评估及认可情况调查的方案
The STROBE extensions: protocol for a qualitative assessment of content and a survey of endorsement.
作者信息
Sharp Melissa K, Utrobičić Ana, Gómez Guadalupe, Cobo Erik, Wager Elizabeth, Hren Darko
机构信息
Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Split, Split, Croatia.
Sorbonne Paris Cité, Pierre Louis Doctoral School: Epidemiology and Biomedical Sciences, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.
出版信息
BMJ Open. 2017 Oct 22;7(10):e019043. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019043.
INTRODUCTION
The STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement was developed in response to inadequate reporting of observational studies. In recent years, several extensions to STROBE have been created to provide more nuanced field-specific guidance for authors. The content and the prevalence of extension endorsement have not yet been assessed. Accordingly, there are two aims: (1) to classify changes made in the extensions to identify strengths and weaknesses of the original STROBE checklist and (2) to determine the prevalence and typology of endorsement by journals in fields related to extensions.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS
Two independent researchers will assess additions in each extension. Additions will be coded as 'field specific' (FS) or 'not field specific' (NFS). FS is defined as particularly relevant information for a single field and guidance provided generally cannot be extrapolated beyond that field. NFS is defined as information that reflects epidemiological or methodological tenets and can be generalised to most, if not all, types of observational research studies. Intraclass correlation will be calculated to measure reviewers' concordance. On disagreement, consensus will be sought. Individual additions will be grouped by STROBE checklist items to identify the frequency and distribution of changes.Journals in fields related to extensions will be identified through National Library of Medicine PubMed Broad Subject Terms, screened for eligibility and further distilled via Ovid MEDLINE® search strategies for observational studies. Text describing endorsement will be extracted from each journal's website. A classification scheme will be created for endorsement types and the prevalence of endorsement will be estimated. Analyses will use NVivo V.11 and SAS University Edition.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION
This study does not require ethical approval as it does not involve human participants. This study has been preregistered on Open Science Framework.
引言
为应对观察性研究报告不充分的问题，制定了《加强流行病学观察性研究报告（STROBE）声明》。近年来，已创建了STROBE的几个扩展版本，为作者提供更细致入微的特定领域指导。扩展版本的内容及认可程度尚未得到评估。因此，本研究有两个目标：（1）对扩展版本中的更改进行分类，以确定原始STROBE清单的优点和缺点；（2）确定与扩展版本相关领域的期刊对其认可的程度和类型。
方法与分析
两名独立研究人员将评估每个扩展版本中的新增内容。新增内容将被编码为“特定领域”（FS）或“非特定领域”（NFS）。FS定义为与单个领域特别相关的信息，通常提供的指导不能外推到该领域之外。NFS定义为反映流行病学或方法学原则且可推广到大多数（如果不是全部）观察性研究类型的信息。将计算组内相关性以衡量评审人员的一致性。如有分歧，将寻求共识。单个新增内容将按STROBE清单项目分组，以确定更改的频率和分布。通过美国国立医学图书馆的PubMed广泛主题词识别与扩展版本相关领域的期刊，筛选其是否符合条件，并通过Ovid MEDLINE®观察性研究检索策略进一步筛选。将从每个期刊的网站提取描述认可情况的文本。将创建一个认可类型分类方案，并估计认可的程度。分析将使用NVivo V.11和SAS大学版。
伦理与传播
本研究不需要伦理批准，因为它不涉及人类参与者。本研究已在开放科学框架上预先注册。
Zotero 插件