ArticleBMC medicine2018
Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers.
Article in BMC medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
45 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of the nature and efficacy of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy interventions.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Reproducibility of Deep Learning Algorithms Developed for Medical Imaging Analysis: A Systematic Review.Journal of digital imaging · 2023Pooled it
- [Extensions of guidelines for reporting types of study in medicine].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2022Pooled it
- The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.Systematic reviews · 2021Guideline
- The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.PLoS medicine · 2021Guideline
- Critical Appraisal Tools for Evaluating Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Studies: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement and engagement in methodology research: process, experiences, and recommendations from the SPIRIT- and CONSORT-Surrogate project.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Full title: evaluating AI guidelines in leading family medicine journals: a cross-sectional study.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Exploring ethical elements in reporting guidelines: results from a research-on-research study.Research integrity and peer review · 2025Article
- Writing about health inequality: recommendations for accurate and impactful presentation of evidence.International journal for equity in health · 2025Review
- Experimental reporting of fish transcriptomic responses in environmental toxicology and ecotoxicology.Environmental toxicology and chemistry · 2025Review
- Protocol for development of a checklist and guideline for transparent reporting of cluster analyses (TRoCA).BMJ open · 2025Article
- Aquatic exercise interventions in the treatment of musculoskeletal upper extremity disorders: A scoping review.Clinical rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Development of a Reporting Guideline for Trochim's Concept Mapping.Methods and protocols · 2025Article
- Review
- Investigating the links between questionable research practices, scientific norms and organisational culture.Research integrity and peer review · 2024Article
- Developing clinical prediction models: a step-by-step guide.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Article
- Community-Partnered Research appraisal tool for conducting, reporting and assessing community-based research.BMJ open · 2024Review
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is clear guidance on the responsibilities of editors to ensure that the research they publish is of the highest possible quality. Poor reporting is unethical and directly impacts patient care. Reporting guidelines are a relatively recent development to help improve the accuracy, clarity, and transparency of biomedical publications. They have caught on, with hundreds of reporting guidelines now available. Some journals endorse reporting guidelines while a smaller number have used various approaches to implement them. Yet challenges remain - biomedical research is still not optimally reported despite the abundance of reporting guidelines. Electronic algorithms are now being developed to facilitate the choice of correct reporting guideline(s), while other tools are being integrated into journal editorial management processes. Universities need to consider whether it is responsible to advance careers of faculty based on poorly reported research which is of little societal value. If journals embraced auditing of the quality of articles they publish this would give them and their readers essential feedback from which to improve their product.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.