A methodological review of the quality of reporting of surveys in transfusion medicine

被引:11
作者
Pagano, Monica B. [1 ]
Dunbar, Nancy M. [2 ]
Tinmouth, Alan [3 ,4 ]
Apelseth, Torunn Oveland [5 ,6 ]
Lozano, Miguel [7 ]
Cohn, Claudia S. [8 ]
Stanworth, Simon J. [9 ,10 ,11 ]
机构
[1] Univ Washington, Dept Lab Med, Div Transfus Med, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[2] Dartmouth Hitchcock Med Ctr, Dept Pathol & Lab Med, Lebanon, NH 03766 USA
[3] Univ Ottawa, Ottawa Hosp, Res Inst, Dept Med,Ctr Transfus Res, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Ottawa, Ottawa Hosp, Res Inst, Dept Lab Med & Pathol,Ctr Transfus Res, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[5] Haukeland Hosp, Lab Clin Biochem, Bergen, Norway
[6] Haukeland Hosp, Dept Immunol & Transfus Med, Bergen, Norway
[7] Univ Barcelona, IDIBAPS, Univ Clin Hosp, Dept Hemotherapy & Hemostasis, Barcelona, Spain
[8] Univ Minnesota, Dept Lab Med & Pathol, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[9] Oxford Univ Hosp, Dept Haematol, Oxford, England
[10] John Radcliffe Hosp, NHS Blood & Transplant, Oxford, England
[11] Univ Oxford, Radcliffe Dept Med, Oxford, England
关键词
D O I
10.1111/trf.14937
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS Surveys are a common tool used to gather information about practices across many medical specialties. The quality of survey reporting impacts the strength of any conclusions. Thorough and accurate reporting of survey-based research is critical for evaluation of the validity, reliability, and generalizability of the results. The objective of this study was to appraise the quality of recently reported surveys in transfusion medicine (TM). A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify studies evaluating clinical practices in TM that used a questionnaire as the research tool and were published between January 2001 and November 2017. Manuscripts that met eligible criteria were appraised using a modified Survey Reporting Guideline questionnaire. RESULTS CONCLUSION The search identified 1632 references, from which 54 abstracts met eligibility criteria for analysis. Only seven (13%) manuscripts reported reliability and validity of the survey tool, 26 (48%) provided a description of the survey population and sample frame, and 11 (20%) indicated the representativeness of the underlying population. Additional reporting limitations included 31 (57%) manuscripts reporting the response rate calculation, two (4%) the analysis of nonresponse error, nine (17%) the method description for handling of missing data, 11 (20%) the analysis of responder and nonresponder characteristics, and 23 (43%) explicitly discussed the generalizability of the results. Our findings document quality deficiencies in the reporting of research conducted using surveys in TM. Validated guidelines for the reporting of survey-based clinical research should be developed and applied to improve the quality of survey reporting in TM.
引用
收藏
页码:2720 / 2727
页数:8
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]   Room for improvement? Reporting response rates and recruitment in nursing research in the past decade [J].
Badger, F ;
Werrett, J .
JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 2005, 51 (05) :502-510
[2]   Reporting Guidelines for Survey Research: An Analysis of Published Guidance and Reporting Practices [J].
Bennett, Carol ;
Khangura, Sara ;
Brehaut, Jamie C. ;
Graham, Ian D. ;
Moher, David ;
Potter, Beth K. ;
Grimshaw, Jeremy M. .
PLOS MEDICINE, 2011, 8 (08)
[3]   AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care [J].
Brouwers, Melissa C. ;
Kho, Michelle E. ;
Browman, George P. ;
Burgers, Jako S. ;
Cluzeau, Francoise ;
Feder, Gene ;
Fervers, Beatrice ;
Graham, Ian D. ;
Grimshaw, Jeremy ;
Hanna, Steven E. ;
Littlejohns, Peter ;
Makarski, Julie ;
Zitzelsberger, Louise .
CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2010, 182 (18) :E839-E842
[4]   Quality of reporting of surveys in critical care journals: A methodologic review [J].
Duffett, Mark ;
Burns, Karen E. ;
Adhikari, Neill K. ;
Arnold, Donald M. ;
Lauzier, Francois ;
Kho, Michelle E. ;
Meade, Maureen O. ;
Hayani, Omar ;
Koo, Karen ;
Choong, Karen ;
Lamontagne, Francois ;
Zhou, Qi ;
Cook, Deborah J. .
CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2012, 40 (02) :441-449
[5]   Quality of Survey Reporting in Nephrology Journals: A Method logic Review [J].
Li, Alvin Ho-Ting ;
Thomas, Sonia M. ;
Farag, Alexandra ;
Duffett, Mark ;
Garg, Amit X. ;
Naylor, Kyla L. .
CLINICAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY, 2014, 9 (12) :2089-2094
[6]  
Liberati A, 2009, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V339, DOI [10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097, 10.1136/bmj.b2700, 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1, 10.1136/bmj.i4086, 10.1136/bmj.b2535, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.07.299]
[7]   Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines [J].
Moher, David ;
Schulz, Kenneth F. ;
Simera, Iveta ;
Altman, Douglas G. .
PLOS MEDICINE, 2010, 7 (02)
[8]   Invited commentary: The art of making questionnaires better [J].
Rosen, Tony ;
Olsen, Jorn .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2006, 164 (12) :1145-1149
[9]   Inaccessible novel questionnaires in published medical research: Hidden methods, hidden costs [J].
Schilling, Lisa M. ;
Kozak, Katarzyna ;
Lundahl, Kristy ;
Dellavalle, Robert P. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2006, 164 (12) :1141-1144
[10]   CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomised Trials [J].
Schulz, Kenneth F. ;
Altman, Douglas G. ;
Moher, David .
PLOS MEDICINE, 2010, 7 (03) :1-7