Improving transparency in publishing: gaps in standardised reporting across surgical pathology and laboratory medicine journals

Aims Research reporting checklists are itemised writing standards to improve transparency and facilitate reproducibility. Previous assessments of their recommendation or requirement have demonstrated improved checklist adherence across medical specialties and study designs. Here, we investigated the endorsement of reporting checklists within pathology, laboratory medicine and forensic science journals. Methods We queried Google Scholar Metrics and the Scopus CiteScore tool to identify top pathology and forensic medicine journals. Two authors independently assessed for the mention, recommendation or requirement or checklists—derived from the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency Of Health Research (EQUATOR) network—as well as study preregistration within each journal’s aims and instructions for authors. Journal editors were contacted by one author every 3 weeks to confirm whether or not certain study designs would be considered for publication. Results Of the 88 journals evaluated, most did not mention or endorse the EQUATOR Network (73.9%) or International Committee of Medical Journal Editors reporting standards (51.1%). The most commonly reported checklists included Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (38.6%), Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (28.4%) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (25.0%). The CARE reporting checklist for case reports was required most often by five journals (5.7%). The final email response from journal editors and contacts was 9.1%. Conclusions Reporting checklists were suboptimally mentioned and rarely required. Even with many basic and diagnostic science reporting checklists and initiatives, endorsement remains low. We recommend that authors, reviewers and editors become familiar with relevant reporting checklists for their fields and publishing spaces to improve checklist visibility and adherence for scientific transparency, reproducibility and rigour.