The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.
Open accessAbstract
Poor reporting of research hampers assessment and makes it less useful. An international group of methodologists, researchers, and journal editors sets out guidelines to improve reports of observational studies
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The research was developed and conducted following the international reporting guidelines (STROBE, CHERRIES and CROSS) [52–54], ensuring methodological rigor.”
From Knowledge and use, Perceptions of Benefits and Limitations of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots among Italian Physiotherapy students: a cross-sectional National Study (2025) · cites this paper as [53]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This study adhered to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines for cross-sectional studies, and the completed checklist is included in Additional File 4 [52].”
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted in accordance with (a) the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) [52] (b) the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) [53] and (c) the Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS) [54] guidelines.”
In the citing paper
“The evidence based approach we have used for CONSORT also served as a model for development of other reporting guidelines, such as for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies evaluating interventions [16], diagnostic studies [17], and observational studies [18].”
From CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010) · cites this paper as [18]
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, TRIPOD is also not intended for impact studies that quantify the impact of using a prediction model on participant or doctors' behavior and management, participant health outcomes, or cost-effectiveness of care, compared with not using the model (13,38).”
From Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): The TRIPOD Statement (2015) · cites this paper as [38]
In the citing paper
“The evidence based approach we have used for CON-SORT also served as a model for development of other reporting guidelines, such as for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies evaluating interventions [16], diagnostic studies [17], and observational studies [18].”
From CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. (2010) · cites this paper as [18]
In the citing paper
“While making revisions, conscious efforts were made to harmonize our recommendations with other reporting guidelines, and where possible we chose the same or similar wording for items [37,39,41,45,46].”
From Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD Statement (2015) · cites this paper as [39]
In the citing paper
“We reported our findings according to STROBE guidelines.28”
From Factors associated with recurrent emergency department visits among people living with dementia: A retrospective cohort study (2023) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“In accordance with STROBE guidelines, a sensitivity analysis [26] was conducted for each model by removing 10% of cases at random and checking for a statistically significant change in the results.”
In the citing paper
“The STROBE (strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology) guidelines for observational research25 26 were developed for the three main study designs in epidemiology (cohort, case-control, and cross sectional studies).”
From Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology using Mendelian Randomisation (STROBE-MR): explanation and elaboration. (2021) · cites this paper as [25]
In the citing paper
“However, none of these guidelines are entirely appropriate for prediction model studies.”
From Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): The TRIPOD Statement (2015) · cites this paper as [39]
In the citing paper
“We have followed the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement in preparing the article [26].”
From Initial Outcomes of Transdiagnostic Internet-Delivered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Tailored to Public Safety Personnel: Longitudinal Observational Study (2021) · cites this paper as [26]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., Egger, M., & Initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297 · Cited by 8,613
Self-citationMoher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Altman, D. G. (2001) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)04337-3 · Cited by 5,373
Self-citationMoher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., & Stroup, D. F. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(99)04149-5 · Cited by 4,826
Consort 2010 statement: extension to cluster randomised trials
Campbell, M. K., Piaggio, G., Elbourne, D. R., Altman, D. G., & for the CONSORT Group (2012) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.e5661 · Cited by 3,510
Self-citationAssessing the quality of controlled clinical trials
Jüni, P., Altman, D. G., & Egger, M. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42 · Cited by 3,309
Self-citationTowards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative.
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., de Vet, H. C. W., et al. (2003) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-138-1-200301070-00010 · Cited by 3,219
Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41 · Cited by 3,215
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., & Egger, M. (2007) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/ede.0b013e3181577511 · Cited by 2,779
Self-citationMoher, D., Schulz, K. F., & Altman, D. G. (2001) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-1-2 · Cited by 2,755
Self-citationPiaggio, G., Elbourne, D. R., Pocock, S. J., Evans, S. J. W., Altman, D. G., & CONSORT Group, F. T. (2012) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2012.87802 · Cited by 2,428
Self-citationWhy we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care
Black, N. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.312.7040.1215 · Cited by 1,598
Better Reporting of Harms in Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement
Ioannidis, J. P. A., Evans, S. J. W., Gøtzsche, P. C., O'Neill, R. T., Altman, D. G., Schulz, K., Moher, D., & for the CONSORT Group* (2004) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-141-10-200411160-00009 · Cited by 1,593
Self-citationSanderson, S., Tatt, I. D., & Higgins, J. P. (2007) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dym018 · Cited by 1,531
Competing interests: none declared.
Hirsch, L. (2006) · Cited by 1,396
Meta-analysis Spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies
Egger, M., Schneider, M., & Smith, G. D. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7125.140 · Cited by 997
Self-citationPlint, A. C., Moher, D., Morrison, A., Schulz, K., Altman, D. G., Hill, C., & Gaboury, I. (2006) · Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2006.tb00557.x · Cited by 872
Self-citationReporting Randomized, Controlled Trials of Herbal Interventions: An Elaborated CONSORT Statement
Gagnier, J. J., Boon, H., Rochon, P., Moher, D., Barnes, J., Bombardier, C., & for the CONSORT Group* (2006) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-144-5-200603070-00013 · Cited by 608
Assessing the quality of research.
Glasziou, P., Vandenbroucke, J., & Chalmers, I. (2004) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7430.39 · Cited by 391
Self-citationQuality of reporting of observational longitudinal research.
Tooth, L. (2005) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwi042 · Cited by 363
Value of Flow Diagrams in Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials
Egger, M. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.285.15.1996 · Cited by 317
Self-citationIssues in the reporting of epidemiological studies: a survey of recent practice.
Pocock, S. J., Collier, T. J., Dandreo, K. J., de Stavola, B. L., Goldman, M. B., Kalish, L. A., Kasten, L. E., & McCormack, V. A. (2004) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.38250.571088.55 · Cited by 313
Self-citationCONSORT Revised—Improving the Reporting of Randomized Trials
Rennie, D. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.285.15.2006 · Cited by 293
A road map for efficient and reliable human genome epidemiology.
The Human Genome Epidemiology Network and the Network of Investigator Networks, Ioannidis, J. P. A., Gwinn, M., Little, J., Higgins, J. P. T., Bernstein, J. L., Boffetta, P., Bondy, M., Bray, M. S., Brenchley, P. E., et al. (2006) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng0106-3 · Cited by 244
Comparison of evidence on harms of medical interventions in randomized and nonrandomized studies
Papanikolaou, P. N. (2006) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.050873 · Cited by 229
Bartlett, C., Sterne, J., & Egger, M. (2002) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7355.81 · Cited by 222
Self-citationClinical Epidemiological Quality in Molecular Genetic Research
Bogardus, S. T., Concato, J., & Feinstein, A. R. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.281.20.1919 · Cited by 170
Bias in psychiatric case–control studies: Literature survey
Lee, W., Bindman, J., Ford, T., Glozier, N., Moran, P., Stewart, R., & Hotopf, M. (2007) · British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.106.027250 · Cited by 92
Moher, D. (2004) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.1040031 · Cited by 85
Suggestions for Improving the Reporting of Clinical Research: The Role of Narrative
Schriger, D. L. (2005) · Annals of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2004.09.022 · Cited by 42
US ponders unlocking the gates to prisoner research
Waltz, E. (2005) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/nm0106-3 · Cited by 28
CONSORT your submissions: an update for authors
Ormerod, A. D. (2008) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2001.04404.x · Cited by 13
Cited by
Sorted by citations
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
the CONSORT Group, Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., & Moher, D. (2010) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/1741-7015-8-18 · Cited by 13,371
Self-citationStandards for Reporting Qualitative Research: A Synthesis of Recommendations
O’Brien, B. C., Harris, I. B., Beckman, T. J., Reed, D. A., & Cook, D. A. (2014) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000000388 · Cited by 12,211
Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance
Craig, P., Dieppe, P., Macintyre, S., Michie, S., Nazareth, I., & Petticrew, M. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.a1655 · Cited by 10,995
Hoffmann, T. C., Glasziou, P. P., Boutron, I., Milne, R., Perera, R., Moher, D., Altman, D. G., Barbour, V., Macdonald, H., Johnston, M., et al. (2014) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g1687 · Cited by 10,548
Self-citationSterne, J. A. C., White, I. R., Carlin, J. B., Spratt, M., Royston, P., Kenward, M. G., Wood, A. M., & Carpenter, J. R. (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2393 · Cited by 7,299
Metadata
- Authors
- Elm, E. V., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Vandenbroucke, J. P.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- University of Bern (CH)
- University of London (GB)
- Cochrane (DK)
- Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2007-10-18
- Volume
- 335
- Issue
- 7624
- Pages
- 806-808
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- PMC
- PMC2034723
- OpenAlex
- W3022423927
- Cited by
- 10,766
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2056 · 2025: 1910 · 2024: 1655 · 2023: 1056 · 2022: 864 · 2021: 819 · 2020: 528 · 2019: 416 · 2018: 326 · 2017: 244 · 2016: 214 · 2015: 178 · 2014: 126 · 2013: 87 · 2012: 86
- FWCI
- 49.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Keywords
- STROBE statement, reporting guidelines, observational studies, reporting quality, case-control study, cohort studies, systematic reviews
- MeSH terms
- Epidemiologic Methods, Causality, Observation, Consensus, Biomedical Research
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
