Prior articles have reviewed reporting guidelines and study evaluation tools for clinical
research. However, only some of the many available accepted reporting guidelines at
the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research Network have been discussed
in previous reports. In this paper, we review the key Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency
Of health Research reporting guidelines that have not been previously discussed. The
study types include diagnostic and prognostic studies, reliability and agreement studies,
observational studies, analytical and descriptive, experimental studies, quality improvement
studies, qualitative research, health informatics, systematic reviews and meta-analyses,
economic evaluations, and mixed methods studies. There are also sections on study
protocols, and statistical analyses and methods. In each section, there is a brief
overview of the study type, and then the reporting guideline(s) that are most applicable
to radiology researchers including radiologists involved in health services research
are discussed.
Key Words
- Analytical observational studies
- descriptive observational studies
- diagnostic studies
- economic evaluations
- experimental studies
- health informatics
- health services research reporting guidelines
- mixed methods studies
- prognostic studies
- qualitative research
- quality improvement studies
- radiology research
- reliability and agreement studies
- statistical analyses and methods
- systematic reviews and meta-analyses
- study protocols
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Academic RadiologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Interpreting diagnostic accuracy studies for patient care.BMJ. 2012; 345: e3999
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.Clin Chem Lab Med. 2003; 41: 68-73
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.BMJ. 2003; 326: 41-44
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.Radiology. 2003; 226: 24-28
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.Ann Intern Med. 2003; 138: 40-44
- Toward complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy. The STARD initiative.Am J Clin Pathol. 2003; 119: 18-22
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.Clin Biochem. 2003; 36: 2-7
- Toward complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.Acad Radiol. 2003; 10: 664-669
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003; 181: 51-55
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.Clin Radiol. 2003; 58: 575-580
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.Croat Med J. 2003; 44: 635-638
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.Fam Pract. 2004; 21: 4-10
- Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.Clin Chem. 2003; 49: 1-6
- (Available at) (Accessed June 25, 2014)
- STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies.BMJ. 2015; 351 (h5527)
- STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies.Radiology. 2015; 277: 826-832
- STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies.Clin Chem. 2015; 61: 1446-1452
- How to report a research study.Acad Radiol. 2014; 21: 1088-1116
- (Available at) (Accessed December 21, 2013)
- (Available at) (Accessed January 4, 2016)
- (Available at) (Accessed January 4, 2016)
- (Available at) (Accessed March 9, 2015)
- Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed.J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 96-106
- Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed.Int J Nurs Stud. 2011; 48: 661-671
- (Available at) (Accessed June 25, 2014)
- The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.Ann Intern Med. 2007; 147: 573-577
- The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.PLoS Med. 2007; 4: e296
- Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.BMJ. 2007; 335: 806-808
- The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.Prev Med. 2007; 45: 247-251
- The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.Epidemiology. 2007; 18: 800-804
- The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.Lancet. 2007; 370: 1453-1457
- The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.J Clin Epidemiol. 2008; 61: 344-349
- The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.Bull World Health Organ. 2007; 85: 867-872
- Improving the reporting of clinical case series.Am J Ophthalmol. 2005; 139: 900-905
- Appropriate use and reporting of uncontrolled case series in the medical literature.Am J Ophthalmol. 2011; 151: 7-10.e1
- Instructions to authors for case reporting are limited: a review of a core journal list.BMC Med Educ. 2004; 4: 4
- The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development.BMJ Case Rep. 2013; 2013
- The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development.Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2013; 110: 603-608
- The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development.J Med Case Rep. 2013; 7: 223
- The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case report guideline development.J Clin Epidemiol. 2014; 67: 46-51
- The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case report guideline development.J Diet Suppl. 2013; 10: 381-390
- (Available at) (Accessed June 25, 2014)
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- “Big data” reporting guidelines: how to answer big questions, yet avoid big problems.Bone Joint J. 2014; 96-B: 1575-1577
- (Available at) (Accessed January 4, 2016)
- (Available at) (Accessed January 4, 2016)
- Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: defining, reporting and interpreting nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report—Part I.Value Health. 2009; 12: 1044-1052
- Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: approaches to mitigate bias and confounding in the design of nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report—Part II.Value Health. 2009; 12: 1053-1061
- Good research practices for comparative effectiveness research: analytic methods to improve causal inference from nonrandomized studies of treatment effects using secondary data sources: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Retrospective Database Analysis Task Force Report—Part III.Value Health. 2009; 12: 1062-1073
- (Available at) (Accessed January 4, 2016)
- (Available at) (Accessed January 4, 2016)
- Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research.Int J Qual Health Care. 2003; 15: 261-266
- Improving the quality of web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES).J Med Internet Res. 2004; 6: e34
- A guide for the design and conduct of self-administered surveys of clinicians.CMAJ. 2008; 179: 245-252
- The National Lung Screening Trial: overview and study design.Radiology. 2011; 258: 243-253
- (Available at) (Accessed June 25, 2014)
- CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials.Ann Intern Med. 2010; 152: 726-732
- CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.BMC Med. 2010; 8: 18
- CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.BMJ. 2010; 340: c332
- CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.J Clin Epidemiol. 2010; 63: 834-840
- CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials.Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 115: 1063-1070
- CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.PLoS Med. 2010; 7: e1000251
- CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.Trials. 2010; 11: 32
- CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.Int J Surg. 2011; 9: 672-677
- Consort 2010 statement: extension to cluster randomised trials.BMJ. 2012; 345: e5661
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement.JAMA. 2012; 308: 2594-2604
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- Methods and processes of the CONSORT Group: example of an extension for trials assessing nonpharmacologic treatments.Ann Intern Med. 2008; 148: W60-W66
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement.Ann Intern Med. 2004; 141: 781-788
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement.BMJ. 2008; 337: a2390
- (Available at) (Accessed March 9, 2015)
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- Patient-centered outcomes research in radiology: trends in funding and methodology.Acad Radiol. 2014; 21: 1156-1161
- Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in randomized trials: the CONSORT PRO extension.JAMA. 2013; 309: 814-822
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND statement.Am J Public Health. 2004; 94: 361-366
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- (Available at) (Accessed June 25, 2014)
- Publication guidelines for quality improvement in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE project.Qual Saf Health Care. 2008; 17: i3-i9
- Publication guidelines for quality improvement studies in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE project.BMJ. 2009; 338: a3152
- Development of the SQUIRE Publication Guidelines: evolution of the SQUIRE project.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008; 34: 681-687
- Publication guidelines for improvement studies in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE Project.Ann Intern Med. 2008; 149: 670-676
- Publication guidelines for quality improvement studies in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE project.J Gen Intern Med. 2008; 23: 2125-2130
- Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.Int J Qual Health Care. 2007; 19: 349-357
- STARE-HI—Statement on reporting of evaluation studies in Health Informatics.Int J Med Inform. 2009; 78: 1-9
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.PLoS Med. 2009; 6: e1000097
- Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.BMJ. 2009; 339: b2535
- Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151 (W64): 264-269
- Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.J Clin Epidemiol. 2009; 62: 1006-1012
- (Available at) (Accessed June 25, 2014)
- Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group.JAMA. 2000; 283: 2008-2012
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting.BMJ. 2010; 340: c221
- Diagnostic accuracy of diffusion tensor imaging in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.Acad Radiol. 2013; 20: 1099-1106
- Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012; 12: 181
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.Eur J Health Econ. 2013; 14: 367-372
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.Value Health. 2013; 16: e1-e5
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.Clin Ther. 2013; 35: 356-363
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2013; 11: 6
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.BMC Med. 2013; 11: 80
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.BMJ. 2013; 346: f1049
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.Pharmacoeconomics. 2013; 31: 361-367
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.J Med Econ. 2013; 16: 713-719
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013; 29: 117-122
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.BJOG. 2013; 120: 765-770
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- The quality of mixed methods studies in health services research.J Health Serv Res Policy. 2008; 13: 92-98
- SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials.Ann Intern Med. 2013; 158: 200-207
- IMpact of Platelet Rich plasma OVer alternative therapies in patients with lateral Epicondylitis (IMPROVE): protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled study: a multicenter, randomized trial comparing autologous platelet-rich plasma, autologous whole blood, dry needle tendon fenestration, and physical therapy exercises alone on pain and quality of life in patients with lateral epicondylitis.Acad Radiol. 2014; 21: 1144-1155
- (Available at) (Accessed June 25, 2014)
- Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement.Syst Rev. 2015; 4
- (Available at) (Accessed March 1, 2015)
- Basic statistical reporting for articles published in biomedical journals: the “Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature” or the SAMPL Guidelines.Int J Nurs Stud. 2015; 52: 5-9
- Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): explanation and elaboration.Ann Intern Med. 2015; 162: W1-W73
- CONSORT for reporting randomised trials in journal and conference abstracts.Lancet. 2008; 371: 281-283
- PRISMA for abstracts: reporting systematic reviews in journal and conference abstracts.PLoS Med. 2013; 10: e1001419
Article Info
Publication History
Published online: February 23, 2016
Accepted:
January 9,
2016
Received in revised form:
January 8,
2016
Received:
March 19,
2015
Identification
Copyright
© 2016 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
