Using Reporting Guidelines Effectively to Ensure Good Reporting of Health Research
Abstract
This chapter examines how reporting guidelines can be used by researchers and others to improve the quality of the accumulating research literature and ultimately benefit patients. It considers whose responsibility it is to ensure good reporting of research. A reporting guideline lists the minimum set of items that should be included in a research report to provide a clear and transparent account of what was done and what was found. Researchers are the primary target group of most reporting guidelines as they benefit directly from their use both as authors and peer reviewers of research articles. However, many others can indirectly benefit from the use of reporting guidelines: readers of research articles, systematic reviewers, clinical guideline developers, research funders, journal editors and publishers, patients, and society at large. Journal editors can use reporting guidelines in several ways.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Reporting guidelines have been shown to increase methodological transparency and uptake of research findings.
“Reporting guidelines outline a minimum set of items to include in research reports and have been shown to increase methodological transparency and uptake of research findings (8, 9).”
From PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018) · cites this paper as [8]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 18 · Cited by 34
- Authors
- Altman, D. G., & Simera, I.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Venue
- Guidelines for Reporting Health Research: A User's Manual
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-07-25
- Pages
- 32-40
- OpenAlex
- W1574372378
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2016: 2
- Type
- other
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Keywords
- reporting guidelines, research transparency, peer review, journal editors, systematic reviews, clinical guideline development, research funding agencies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review