Annals of Epidemiology
Volume 20, Issue 1 , Pages 67-73, January 2010

Assessing the Quality of Reporting of Observational Studies in Cancer

  • Afroditi A. Papathanasiou, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Biomathematics, University of Thessaly School of Medicine, Larissa, Greece
    • ,
  • Elias Zintzaras, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Biomathematics, University of Thessaly School of Medicine, Larissa, Greece
    • Center for Clinical Evidence Synthesis, The Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to: Elias Zintzaras, PhD, Department of Biomathematics, University of Thessaly School of Medicine, Papauyriazi 22, Larissa 41222, Greece. Tel/fax: +30-2410-565063.

Received 1 June 2009; accepted 10 September 2009.

Purpose

The vast majority of epidemiological studies in cancer are observational. However, inadequate reporting of the published observational studies (OS) may restrict the generalizability and credibility of study results. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reporting quality of OS concerning cancer.

Methods

PubMed was searched for systematic reviews (SRs) of OS involving cancer published from January 2008 through February 2009. The citations provided in the SRs were evaluated for their reporting quality according to the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement, a checklist of items that are considered essential for good reporting of OS. The evaluation was focused on 25 methodological items/sub-items. The effect of journals' ranking in quality of reporting was also evaluated.

Results

The search identified 244 eligible OS included in seven SRs. Nine items/sub-items were reported by more than 90% of studies and 16 items/sub-items were reported by more than 70%. Some essential methodological aspects of OS (such as matching, absolute risks, missing data and flow diagram) were underreported. Significant differences were found among the seven SRs in the majority of the items. High and lower ranked journals were different only in reporting of results estimates and precision.

Conclusions

The quality of reporting in OS in cancer was considered satisfactory, although certain items were underreported. Further improvement of reporting may enhance the validity of observational research.

Key Words: STROBE, Observational Study, Quality, Epidemiology, Cancer, Methodology

Selected Abbreviations and Acronyms: OS, observational studies, SRs, systematic reviews, STROBE, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology, IF, impact factor, GC, cancer in general, PCd, prostate cancer (and dairy products/micronutrients use), PCs, prostate cancer (and statin use), CC, colorectal cancer/adenoma, BCa, breast cancer (and aspirin use), MBC, metastatic breast cancer, EC, endometrial cancer, PC/BLC, prostate or bladder cancer

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1047-2797(09)00319-6

doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2009.09.007

Annals of Epidemiology
Volume 20, Issue 1 , Pages 67-73, January 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution