Reporting guidelines and journal quality in otolaryngology

被引:4
作者
Henderson, A. H. [1 ]
Upile, T. [2 ]
Pilavakis, Y. [2 ]
Patel, N. N. [2 ]
机构
[1] Great Western Hosp, Dept ENT, Swindon SN25 1SY, Wilts, England
[2] Univ Hosp Southampton NHS Trust, Dept ENT, Southampton, Hants, England
关键词
IMPACT; COMPLETENESS; TRIALS;
D O I
10.1111/coa.12546
中图分类号
R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100213 ;
摘要
ObjectivesJournals increasingly use reporting guidelines to standardise research papers, partly to improve quality. Although defining journal quality is difficult, various calculated metrics are used. This study investigates guideline adoption by otolaryngology journals and whether a relationship exists between this and journal quality. Design, Setting, ParticipantsRetrospective MEDLINE database review for English language, Index Medicus, journals of interest to otolaryngologists (October 2013). Main Outcome MeasuresThe resulting journals were examined for the number of guidelines endorsed and then tabulated against surrogate measures of journal quality (Impact factor, Eigenfactor, SCImago, Source-Normalised rank). The primary outcome measure was the number of recognised reporting guidelines endorsed per journal. This was then correlated against journal quality scores. For comparison, a further small sample correlation was performed with 6 randomly selected and 6 high-profile clinical non-otolaryngology journals. Results37 otolaryngology journals were identified. Number of guidelines used and quality scores were not normally distributed. Mean guideline usage was 1.0 for otolaryngology journals, 1.5 for randomly selected, and 5.5 for the high-profile journals. Only 18/37 (49%) otolaryngology journals endorsed any guidelines, compared with 11/12 non-otolaryngology journals. Within otolaryngology, Eigenfactor positively correlated with guideline use (r = 0.4, n = 44, p < 0.01) otherwise no correlation was found between guideline endorsement and journal quality. ConclusionsReporting guideline endorsement within otolaryngology journals is low. Although it might be expected that use of reporting guidelines improved quality, this is not reflected in the derived quality scores in otolaryngology. This may reflect low levels of use/enforcement, that quality indicators are inherently flawed, or that generalised guidelines are not always appropriate or valued by editors.
引用
收藏
页码:461 / 466
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Reporting guidelines for human microbiome research: the STORMS checklist
    Mirzayi, Chloe
    Renson, Audrey
    Zohra, Fatima
    Elsafoury, Shaimaa
    Geistlinger, Ludwig
    Kasselman, Lora J.
    Eckenrode, Kelly
    van de Wijgert, Janneke
    Loughman, Amy
    Marques, Francine Z.
    MacIntyre, David A.
    Arumugam, Manimozhiyan
    Azhar, Rimsha
    Beghini, Francesco
    Bergstrom, Kirk
    Bhatt, Ami
    Bisanz, Jordan E.
    Braun, Jonathan
    Bravo, Hector Corrada
    Buck, Gregory A.
    Bushman, Frederic
    Casero, David
    Clarke, Gerard
    Carmen Collado, Maria
    Cotter, Paul D.
    Cryan, John F.
    Demmer, Ryan T.
    Devkota, Suzanne
    Elinav, Eran
    Escobar, Juan S.
    Fettweis, Jennifer
    Finn, Robert D.
    Fodor, Anthony A.
    Forslund, Sofia
    Franke, Andre
    Furlanello, Cesare
    Gilbert, Jack
    Grice, Elizabeth
    Haibe-Kains, Benjamin
    Handley, Scott
    Herd, Pamela
    Holmes, Susan
    Jacobs, Jonathan P.
    Karstens, Lisa
    Knight, Rob
    Knights, Dan
    Koren, Omry
    Kwon, Douglas S.
    Langille, Morgan
    Lindsay, Brianna
    [J]. NATURE MEDICINE, 2021, 27 (11) : 1885 - 1892
  • [42] Guidelines for standardizing and increasing the transparency in the reporting of biomedical research
    Khan, Amir Maroof
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2017, 9 (08) : 2697 - 2702
  • [43] Transparent Communication of Radiology Research: Reporting Guidelines and Beyond
    Lu, Ying
    Ioannidis, John P. A.
    [J]. ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2016, 23 (05) : 529 - 530
  • [44] The Impact of APA and AERA Guidelines on Effect Size Reporting
    Chao-Ying Joanne Peng
    Li-Ting Chen
    Hsu-Min Chiang
    Yi-Chen Chiang
    [J]. Educational Psychology Review, 2013, 25 : 157 - 209
  • [45] 2024 Guidelines for reporting radiation therapy in veterinary medicine
    Willows, Brooke
    Melhus, Christopher
    [J]. VETERINARY RADIOLOGY & ULTRASOUND, 2024, 65 (05) : 547 - 555
  • [46] Quality Management in Otolaryngology - An Assessment of the Current Situation On Current View, how is the State of Quality Standards in German Hospitals and Practices, esp. in Otolaryngology? An Appraisal with Outlook
    Wallner, Frank
    [J]. LARYNGO-RHINO-OTOLOGIE, 2020, 99 : S1 - S48
  • [47] The journal quality perception gap
    Bryce, Cormac
    Dowling, Michael
    Lucey, Brian
    [J]. RESEARCH POLICY, 2020, 49 (05)
  • [48] Reporting characteristics of journal infographics: a cross-sectional study
    Ferreira, Giovanni E.
    Elkins, Mark R.
    Jones, Caitlin
    O'Keeffe, Mary
    Cashin, Aidan G.
    Becerra, Rosa E.
    Gamble, Andrew R.
    Zadro, Joshua R.
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [49] Reporting of interventions in randomised trials: an audit of journal Instructions to Authors
    Hoffmann, Tammy
    English, Thomas
    Glasziou, Paul
    [J]. TRIALS, 2014, 15
  • [50] Protocol for a systematic review of N-of-1 trial protocol guidelines and protocol reporting guidelines
    Porcino, Antony J.
    Punja, Salima
    Chan, An-Wen
    Kravitz, Richard
    Orkin, Aaron
    Ravaud, Philippe
    Schmid, Christopher H.
    Vohra, Sunita
    [J]. SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2017, 6