Article type
Year
Abstract
Background:
Several studies have shown important deficiencies in reporting research studies. EQUATOR (Enhancing QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) is a network that promotes the use of free reporting guidelines.
Objectives:
To evaluate the knowledge of the editors of journals indexed by LILACS (a database from Latin America) about reporting guidelines, to assess if the LILACS journals have requirements for using these guidelines and to analyze what the editors think about the causes of the low rate of use of these guidelines.
Methods:
A survey with 20 questions was electronically delivered to editors from biomedical journals indexed in LILACS (a total of 867 journals, 39.2% from Brazil, 15.1% from Argentina, 12.1% from Colombia and one-third from the rest of the Latin American countries). We asked general questions about reporting guidelines and EQUATOR, and specific questions about CONSORT, TREND, STROBE, PRISMA and SQUIRE.
Results:
Out of the 802 editors, 68.4% were reached and 16.4% (97) 97 responded to the survey. Half of the repliers said that they knew about the existence of reporting guidelines and 30% knew about EQUATOR. The best known guidelines were CONSORT (35%), STROBE (30%) and PRISMA (30%). Twenty-eight percent replied that at least one of the five reporting guidelines was mentioned in their instructions for authors. The most common guidelines suggested for peer reviewers were CONSORT, STROBE and PRISMA (each between 10% and 14%). When repliers were asked about the reasons why these types of guidelines were not used, 32% answered that it was because the editor did not know about them, and 28% because the peer reviewers do not know about them.
Conclusions:
This is the first study in Latin America and the Caribbean about editors' knowledge of reporting guidelines. More than half of them do not know about these reporting guidelines (CONSORT was the most popular). The EQUATOR network was not popular either, as only one every three editors know about it. We realize how hard it still is to contact the biomedical journals in this region and how hard it is to spread policies and get the journals to adhere to them.
Several studies have shown important deficiencies in reporting research studies. EQUATOR (Enhancing QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) is a network that promotes the use of free reporting guidelines.
Objectives:
To evaluate the knowledge of the editors of journals indexed by LILACS (a database from Latin America) about reporting guidelines, to assess if the LILACS journals have requirements for using these guidelines and to analyze what the editors think about the causes of the low rate of use of these guidelines.
Methods:
A survey with 20 questions was electronically delivered to editors from biomedical journals indexed in LILACS (a total of 867 journals, 39.2% from Brazil, 15.1% from Argentina, 12.1% from Colombia and one-third from the rest of the Latin American countries). We asked general questions about reporting guidelines and EQUATOR, and specific questions about CONSORT, TREND, STROBE, PRISMA and SQUIRE.
Results:
Out of the 802 editors, 68.4% were reached and 16.4% (97) 97 responded to the survey. Half of the repliers said that they knew about the existence of reporting guidelines and 30% knew about EQUATOR. The best known guidelines were CONSORT (35%), STROBE (30%) and PRISMA (30%). Twenty-eight percent replied that at least one of the five reporting guidelines was mentioned in their instructions for authors. The most common guidelines suggested for peer reviewers were CONSORT, STROBE and PRISMA (each between 10% and 14%). When repliers were asked about the reasons why these types of guidelines were not used, 32% answered that it was because the editor did not know about them, and 28% because the peer reviewers do not know about them.
Conclusions:
This is the first study in Latin America and the Caribbean about editors' knowledge of reporting guidelines. More than half of them do not know about these reporting guidelines (CONSORT was the most popular). The EQUATOR network was not popular either, as only one every three editors know about it. We realize how hard it still is to contact the biomedical journals in this region and how hard it is to spread policies and get the journals to adhere to them.