4.6 Article

Using the STROBE statement: survey findings emphasized the role of journals in enforcing reporting guidelines

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 116, 期 -, 页码 26-35

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.07.019

关键词

Observational studies; Guidelines as topic; Epidemiologic research design; Information dissemination/methods; STROBE; Online survey; Scientific writing

资金

  1. European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant [676207]
  2. Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad [MTM2015-64465-C2-1-R, MDM-2014-0445]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The objective of the study was to identify factors affecting the use of the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement, specifically authors' attitudes toward and experiences with it. Study Design and Setting: An online survey was distributed to authors of observational studies recruited via social media, personal network snowballing, and mass mailings using targeted search strategies. Data on demographics, awareness, motivators, and usage were collected in conjunction with a modified Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) scale on which confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed. Results: One thousand fifteen participants completed the survey. Of these, 185 (18.2%) indicated they had never heard of STROBE nor used it previously, 195 (19.2%) had heard of it but never used it, and 635 (62.6%) had used it. Journals promoting STROBE were both key motivators and awareness mechanisms; peers and educational workshops were also important influencing factors to a lesser degree. The internal consistency of the modified UTAUT scale was strong (Cronbach's alpha = 0.94). CFA supported a four-factor model with 23 questions. Conclusion: The endorsement of STROBE by journals is key to authors' awareness and use of the guideline. We tested and validated our scale which can guide future research on reporting guidelines. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据