Department of Family Medicine, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, Mie 514-0104, Japan.
Hospital Care Research Unit and Department of Respiratory Medicine, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Hyogo 660-8550, Japan.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 May 31;17(11):3898. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17113898.
The objective of this study was to assess the impact of a 2010 community-based participatory research (CBPR) reporting guideline on the quality of reporting a CBPR on smoking cessation. We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases and included articles published up to December 2019 (PROSPERO: CRD42019111668). We assessed reporting quality using the 13-item checklist. Of the 80 articles identified, 42 (53%) were published after 2010. The overall reporting quality before and after 2010 was poor and did not differ significantly (mean difference: 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.21 to 1.53). The total reporting scores of the studies did not differ significantly according to the effect size of the intervention (beta coefficient: -2.86, 95% CI: -5.77 to 0.04). This study demonstrates the need to improve the quality of reporting CBPRs. We recommend that journal editors endorse the CBPR reporting guideline to encourage its use by more researchers.
本研究旨在评估 2010 年社区参与式研究（CBPR）报告指南对戒烟 CBPR 报告质量的影响。我们检索了 MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane 中央对照试验注册中心（CENTRAL）、PsycINFO 和 Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature（CINAHL）数据库，并纳入截至 2019 年 12 月发表的文章（PROSPERO：CRD42019111668）。我们使用 13 项清单评估报告质量。在确定的 80 篇文章中，有 42 篇（53%）发表于 2010 年之后。2010 年前后的整体报告质量较差，且差异无统计学意义（平均差异：0.66，95%置信区间[CI]：-0.21 至 1.53）。根据干预效果大小，研究的总报告评分差异无统计学意义（β系数：-2.86，95%CI：-5.77 至 0.04）。本研究表明需要提高 CBPR 报告的质量。我们建议期刊编辑支持 CBPR 报告指南，以鼓励更多研究人员使用该指南。
