Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32486372›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Reporting Guidelines for Community-Based Participatory Research Did Not Improve the Reporting Quality of Published Studies: A Systematic Review of Studies on Smoking Cessation.

Daisuke Kato, Yuki Kataoka, Erfen Gustiawan Suwangto, Makoto Kaneko, Hideki Wakabayashi, Daisuke Son, Ichiro Kawachi

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Photovoice as a Methodology in Obesity Research: A Scoping Review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Community-Engaged Research in Early Home Visiting: A Scoping Review of Peer-Reviewed Literature.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Daisuke KatoDepartment of Family Medicine, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, Mie 514-0104, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-2449-0548
Yuki KataokaHospital Care Research Unit and Department of Respiratory Medicine, Hyogo Prefectural Amagasaki General Medical Center, Hyogo 660-8550, Japan.
Erfen Gustiawan SuwangtoInstitute for Networking Development of Primary Care Clinics, Department of Medical Ethics, Law, and Primary Care, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta 12930, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-9903-0300
Makoto KanekoDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka 431-3125, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-4581-8274
Hideki WakabayashiDepartment of Community Medicine, Kameyama, Mie University School of Medicine, Mie 514-0104, Japan.
Daisuke SonDepartment of Medical Education Studies, International Research Center for Medical Education, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8654, Japan.
Ichiro KawachiDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, MA 02115, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of a 2010 community-based participatory research (CBPR) reporting guideline on the quality of reporting a CBPR on smoking cessation. We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases and included articles published up to December 2019 (PROSPERO: CRD42019111668). We assessed reporting quality using the 13-item checklist. Of the 80 articles identified, 42 (53%) were published after 2010. The overall reporting quality before and after 2010 was poor and did not differ significantly (mean difference: 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.21 to 1.53). The total reporting scores of the studies did not differ significantly according to the effect size of the intervention (beta coefficient: -2.86, 95% CI: -5.77 to 0.04). This study demonstrates the need to improve the quality of reporting CBPRs. We recommend that journal editors endorse the CBPR reporting guideline to encourage its use by more researchers.

Indexed as

Community-Based Participatory ResearchPublicationsSmoking CessationText MessagingChecklistHumanscommunity-based participatory researchliterature reviewreporting guidelinesmoking cessation

Identifiers

PMID32486372
PMCPMC7312250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.