Hematology journals do not sufficiently adhere to reporting guidelines: a systematic review

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Essentials Reporting guidelines and trial/review registration aim to limit bias in research. We systematically reviewed hematology journals to examine the use of these policies. Forty-eight percent of journals made no use of these policies. Improving the use of reporting guidelines will improve research for all stakeholders. Summary: Background Reporting guidelines and trial/review registration policies have been instituted in order to minimize bias and improve research practices. Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the policies of hematology journals concerning reporting guideline adoption and trial/review registration. Methods We performed a web-based data abstraction from the Instructions for Authors of 67 hematology journals catalogued in the Expanded Science Citation Index of the 2014 Journal Citation Reports to identify whether each journal required, recommended or made no mention of the following reporting guidelines: EQUATOR, ICMJE, CONSORT, MOOSE, QUOROM, PRISMA, STARD, STROBE, ARRIVE and CARE. We also extracted whether journals required or recommended trial or systematic review registration. We e-mailed editors three times to determine which types of studies their journal accepts. Results Forty-eight per cent (32/67) of hematology journals do not adhere to any reporting guidelines. For responding journals, the QUOROM statement, MOOSE, CARE and PROSPERO were the least often mentioned, whereas the ICMJE guidelines, CONSORT statement and general trial registration were most often mentioned. Discussion Reporting guidelines are infrequently required or recommended by hematology journals. Furthermore, few require clinical trial or systematic review database registration. A higher rate of adherence to reporting guidelines can prevent bias from entering the literature. Participation from all stakeholders, including authors and journal editors, to improve reporting guideline and policy practices is required.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)608-617
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Volume15
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Apr 2017

Fingerprint

Hematology
Guidelines
Research
Practice Guidelines
Clinical Trials
Databases

Keywords

  • clinical trial
  • guideline adherence
  • hematology
  • medical research
  • review, systematic

Cite this

@article{318f2cbd5fc04117b733e379e05f6b84,
title = "Hematology journals do not sufficiently adhere to reporting guidelines: a systematic review",
abstract = "Essentials Reporting guidelines and trial/review registration aim to limit bias in research. We systematically reviewed hematology journals to examine the use of these policies. Forty-eight percent of journals made no use of these policies. Improving the use of reporting guidelines will improve research for all stakeholders. Summary: Background Reporting guidelines and trial/review registration policies have been instituted in order to minimize bias and improve research practices. Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the policies of hematology journals concerning reporting guideline adoption and trial/review registration. Methods We performed a web-based data abstraction from the Instructions for Authors of 67 hematology journals catalogued in the Expanded Science Citation Index of the 2014 Journal Citation Reports to identify whether each journal required, recommended or made no mention of the following reporting guidelines: EQUATOR, ICMJE, CONSORT, MOOSE, QUOROM, PRISMA, STARD, STROBE, ARRIVE and CARE. We also extracted whether journals required or recommended trial or systematic review registration. We e-mailed editors three times to determine which types of studies their journal accepts. Results Forty-eight per cent (32/67) of hematology journals do not adhere to any reporting guidelines. For responding journals, the QUOROM statement, MOOSE, CARE and PROSPERO were the least often mentioned, whereas the ICMJE guidelines, CONSORT statement and general trial registration were most often mentioned. Discussion Reporting guidelines are infrequently required or recommended by hematology journals. Furthermore, few require clinical trial or systematic review database registration. A higher rate of adherence to reporting guidelines can prevent bias from entering the literature. Participation from all stakeholders, including authors and journal editors, to improve reporting guideline and policy practices is required.",
keywords = "clinical trial, guideline adherence, hematology, medical research, review, systematic",
author = "C. Wayant and C. Smith and M. Sims and Matt Vassar",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/jth.13637",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "608--617",
journal = "Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis",
issn = "1538-7933",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd",
number = "4",

}

Hematology journals do not sufficiently adhere to reporting guidelines : a systematic review. / Wayant, C.; Smith, C.; Sims, M.; Vassar, Matt.

In: Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis, Vol. 15, No. 4, 01.04.2017, p. 608-617.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Hematology journals do not sufficiently adhere to reporting guidelines

T2 - a systematic review

AU - Wayant, C.

AU - Smith, C.

AU - Sims, M.

AU - Vassar, Matt

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - Essentials Reporting guidelines and trial/review registration aim to limit bias in research. We systematically reviewed hematology journals to examine the use of these policies. Forty-eight percent of journals made no use of these policies. Improving the use of reporting guidelines will improve research for all stakeholders. Summary: Background Reporting guidelines and trial/review registration policies have been instituted in order to minimize bias and improve research practices. Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the policies of hematology journals concerning reporting guideline adoption and trial/review registration. Methods We performed a web-based data abstraction from the Instructions for Authors of 67 hematology journals catalogued in the Expanded Science Citation Index of the 2014 Journal Citation Reports to identify whether each journal required, recommended or made no mention of the following reporting guidelines: EQUATOR, ICMJE, CONSORT, MOOSE, QUOROM, PRISMA, STARD, STROBE, ARRIVE and CARE. We also extracted whether journals required or recommended trial or systematic review registration. We e-mailed editors three times to determine which types of studies their journal accepts. Results Forty-eight per cent (32/67) of hematology journals do not adhere to any reporting guidelines. For responding journals, the QUOROM statement, MOOSE, CARE and PROSPERO were the least often mentioned, whereas the ICMJE guidelines, CONSORT statement and general trial registration were most often mentioned. Discussion Reporting guidelines are infrequently required or recommended by hematology journals. Furthermore, few require clinical trial or systematic review database registration. A higher rate of adherence to reporting guidelines can prevent bias from entering the literature. Participation from all stakeholders, including authors and journal editors, to improve reporting guideline and policy practices is required.

AB - Essentials Reporting guidelines and trial/review registration aim to limit bias in research. We systematically reviewed hematology journals to examine the use of these policies. Forty-eight percent of journals made no use of these policies. Improving the use of reporting guidelines will improve research for all stakeholders. Summary: Background Reporting guidelines and trial/review registration policies have been instituted in order to minimize bias and improve research practices. Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the policies of hematology journals concerning reporting guideline adoption and trial/review registration. Methods We performed a web-based data abstraction from the Instructions for Authors of 67 hematology journals catalogued in the Expanded Science Citation Index of the 2014 Journal Citation Reports to identify whether each journal required, recommended or made no mention of the following reporting guidelines: EQUATOR, ICMJE, CONSORT, MOOSE, QUOROM, PRISMA, STARD, STROBE, ARRIVE and CARE. We also extracted whether journals required or recommended trial or systematic review registration. We e-mailed editors three times to determine which types of studies their journal accepts. Results Forty-eight per cent (32/67) of hematology journals do not adhere to any reporting guidelines. For responding journals, the QUOROM statement, MOOSE, CARE and PROSPERO were the least often mentioned, whereas the ICMJE guidelines, CONSORT statement and general trial registration were most often mentioned. Discussion Reporting guidelines are infrequently required or recommended by hematology journals. Furthermore, few require clinical trial or systematic review database registration. A higher rate of adherence to reporting guidelines can prevent bias from entering the literature. Participation from all stakeholders, including authors and journal editors, to improve reporting guideline and policy practices is required.

KW - clinical trial

KW - guideline adherence

KW - hematology

KW - medical research

KW - review, systematic

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85013743253&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/jth.13637

DO - 10.1111/jth.13637

M3 - Article

C2 - 28122156

AN - SCOPUS:85013743253

VL - 15

SP - 608

EP - 617

JO - Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis

JF - Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis

SN - 1538-7933

IS - 4

ER -