The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for reporting of observational studies

被引：133

作者：

Von Elm E. ^{[1
,7
,8
]}

Altman D.G. ^{[2
]}

Egger M. ^{[1
,3
]}

Pocock S.J. ^{[4
]}

Gøtzsche P.C. ^{[5
]}

Vandenbroucke J.P. ^{[6
]}

机构：

[1] Nordic Cochrane Centre, Copenhagen

[2] Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Hospital, Leiden

[3] Institut für Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (ISPM), Universität Bern, CH-3012 Bern

来源：

Der Internist | 2008年 / 49卷 / 6期

关键词：

Case-control studies; Cohort studies; Cross-sectional studies; Medical research; Observational studies;

D O I：

10.1007/s00108-008-2138-4

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Much of biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies. © 2008 Springer Medizin Verlag.

引用

页码：688 / 693

页数：5

共 29 条

[1]

Guidelines for documentation of epidemiologic studies, Am J Epidemiol, 114, pp. 609-613, (1981)

[2]

Bartlett C., Sterne J., Egger M., What is newsworthy? Longitudinal study of the reporting of medical research in two British newspapers, BMJ, 325, pp. 81-84, (2002)

[3]

Black N., Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care, BMJ, 312, pp. 1215-1218, (1996)

[4]

Bogardus S.T., Concato J., Feinstein A.R., Clinical epidemiological quality in molecular genetic research: The need for methodological standards, JAMA, 281, pp. 1919-1926, (1999)

[5]

Bossuyt P.M., Reitsma J.B., Bruns D.E., Et al., Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative, Ann Intern Med, 138, pp. 40-44, (2003)

[6]

Campbell M.K., Elbourne D.R., Altman D.G., CONSORT statement: Extension to cluster randomised trials, BMJ, 328, pp. 702-708, (2004)

[7]

Egger M., Juni P., Bartlett C., Value of flow diagrams in reports of randomized controlled trials, JAMA, 285, pp. 1996-1999, (2001)

[8]

Egger M., Schneider M., Davey Smith G., Spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies, BMJ, 316, pp. 140-144, (1998)

[9]

Gagnier J.J., Boon H., Rochon P., Et al., Reporting randomized, controlled trials of herbal interventions: An elaborated CONSORT statement, Ann Intern Med, 144, pp. 364-367, (2006)

[10]

Glasziou P., Vandenbroucke J.P., Chalmers I., Assessing the quality of research, BMJ, 328, pp. 39-41, (2004)

← 1 2 3 →