Reporting Guidelines Research Articles

Reduction of MRI-targeted biopsies in men with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance by stratifying to PI-RADS and PSA-density, with different thresholds for significant disease.

BackgroundThe fear of undergrading prostate cancer (PCa) in men on active surveillance (AS) have led to strict criteria for monitoring, which have resulted in good long-term cancer-specific survival, proving the safety of this approach. Reducing undergrading, MRI-targeted biopsies are increasingly used in men with low-risk disease despite their undefined role yet. The objective of this study is to investigate the rate of upgrading using MRI-targeted biopsies in men with low-risk disease on AS, stratified on the basis of PI-RADS and PSA-density, with the aim to reduce potential unnecessary repeat biopsy procedures.MethodsA total of 331 men were prospectively enrolled following the MRI-PRIAS protocol. MR imaging was according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADSv2) guidelines. Suspicious MRI lesions (PI-RADS 3–5) were additionally targeted by MRI-TRUS fusion biopsies. Outcome measure was upgrading to Gleason score (GS) ≥3+4 with MRI-targeted biopsies, stratified for PI-RADS and PSA-density.ResultsIn total, 25% (82/331) of men on AS showed upgrading from GS 3+3. Only 3% (11/331) was upgraded to GS ≥8. In 60% (198/331) a suspicious MRI lesion was identified, but in only 41% (82/198) of men upgrading was confirmed. PI-RADS 3, 4 and 5 categorized index lesions, showed upgrading in 30%, 34% and 66% of men, respectively. Stratification to PI-RADS 4–5, instead of PI-RADS 3–5, would have missed a small number of high volume Gleason 4 PCa in PI-RADS 3 category. However, further stratification into PI-RADS 3 lesions and PSA-density <0.15 ng/mL2 could result in a safe targeted biopsy reduction of 36% in this category, without missing any upgrades.ConclusionsStratification with the combination of PI-RADS and PSA-density may reduce unnecessary additional MRI biopsy testing. Overall, the high rate of detected upgrading in men on AS may result in an unintended tightening of continuing in AS. Since patients, included under current AS criteria showed extremely favorable outcome, there might be no need to further restrict continuing on AS with MRI and targeted biopsies.

Improving Nursing Research Reporting: A guide to Reporting guidelines

Enhancing the quality of the nursing research reporting through structured approach is the key in solving the problems related to reporting. Complete and transparent reporting of nursing research with the standard guidelines such as, The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE), Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), Standards for reporting qualitative research (SRQR), Consensus-based Clinical Case Reporting Guideline (CARE) and Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ)will ensure the transparency through the minimum set of items required to reflect what was one done? What are the outcomes? What are the benefits? What are the issues that bring bias and what are the harms? The ‘Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research’ (EQUATOR) network and ‘Penelope Research’ also helps the authors to solve problem of finding out of relevant reporting guidelines. Whatever may be the reason writing and publishing high impact nursing and health research is the need of the day.

Comparison of inter- and intra-observer variability of breast density assessments using the fourth and fifth editions of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System

BackgroundBreast density is a well-known independent risk factor for breast cancer and can significantly affect the sensitivity of screening mammograms. ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate the intra- and inter-observer consistencies of breast density assessments using methods outlined in the fourth and fifth editions of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) guidelines to determine which method is more reliable. Materials and methodsThree radiologists with subspecialties in breast imaging defined breast density in 72 mammograms four times each: twice using the fourth edition of the ACR BI-RADS guidelines and twice using the fifth edition. The intra- and inter-observer agreements were calculated and compared for each method. ResultsThe weighted kappa values for the overall intra-observer agreement were 0.955 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.931–0.980) and 0.938 (95% CI: 0.907–0.968) when breast densities were assessed according to criteria outlined in the fourth and fifth ACR BI-RADS editions, respectively. The difference between these values was not statistically significant (p = .4). The overall Fleiss-Cohen (quadratic) weighted kappa for inter-observer agreement were 0.623 (95% CI: 0.517–0.729) and 0.702 (95% CI: 0.589–0.815) when breast densities were assessed according to criteria outlined in the fourth and fifth ACR BI-RADS editions, respectively. The difference between these values was not statistically significant (p = .32). Similarly, there were no significant differences in the evaluation of breast density (overall) when comparing breast density assignment using criteria outlined in the fourth and fifth ACR BI-RADS edition (p = .582). ConclusionThe ACR BI-RADS guideline is an acceptable method to classify breast density, resulting in substantial inter-observer agreements using criteria outlined in both the fourth and fifth editions. The intra-observer agreement was nearly perfect for radiologists using criteria outlined in both sets of guidelines. Moreover, although the percentage of women who were classified as having dense breasts was higher when radiologists used the fifth edition of ACR BI-RADS guidelines than when they used the fourth edition, this difference was not statistically significant.

Validation of Three Scoring Risk-Stratification Models for Thyroid Nodules.

To minimize potential harm from overuse of fine-needle aspiration, Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data Systems (TIRADSs) were developed for thyroid nodule risk stratification. The purpose of this study was to perform validation of three scoring risk-stratification models for thyroid nodules using ultrasonography features, a web-based malignancy risk-stratification system, and a model developed by the Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology and the American College of Radiology. Using ultrasonography images, radiologists assessed thyroid nodules according to the following criteria: internal content, echogenicity of the solid portion, shape, margin, and calcifications. A total of 954 patients (Mage = 50.8 years; range 13-86 years) with 1112 nodules were evaluated at the authors' institute from January 2013 to December 2014. The discrimination ability of the three models was assessed by estimating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. Additionally, Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit statistics (calibration ability) were used to evaluate the agreement between the observed and expected number of nodules that were benign or malignant. Thyroid malignancy was present in 37.2% (414/1112) of nodules. According to the 14-point web-based scoring risk-stratification system, malignancy risk ranged from 4.5% to 100.0% and was positively associated with an increase in risk scores. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the validation set were 0.884 in the web-based model, 0.891 in the Korean Society of Thyroid Radiology model, and 0.875 in the American College of Radiology model. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test indicated that the web-based scoring system showed the best-calibrated result, with a p-value of 0.078. The three scoring risk-stratification models using the ultrasonography features of thyroid nodules to stratify malignancy risk showed acceptable predictive accuracy and similar areas under the curve. The web-based scoring system demonstrated the strongest agreement in calibration ability analysis. The easily accessible automated web-based scoring risk-stratification system may overcome the complexity of the various Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System guidelines and provide simplified guidance on personalized and optimal management in real practice.

Baseline Multiparametric MRI for Selection of Prostate Cancer Patients Suitable for Active Surveillance: Which Features Matter?

Increasing evidence has supported the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for the detection of prostate cancer. However, its role in selecting patients clinically suitable for active surveillance (AS) is still in development. We aimed to find relevant mpMRI features that might be helpful for refinement of the selection of low-risk prostate cancer patients for AS. We also evaluated the interobserver variability in reporting prostate mpMRI features. From 2008 to 2012, 135 patients were selected for AS using Epstein criteria. Baseline mpMRI studies were performed within 3 months of recruitment and reviewed by 2 radiologists who were unaware of the patients' outcomes. The radiologists recorded the mpMRI features using the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) guidelines. The overall likelihood of the presence of significant prostate cancer was also determined using the Likert and PI-RADS, version 2 (v2), scores. Univariate and multivariate analyses, receiver operating characteristic curves, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were calculated for the mpMRI features with respect to patient withdrawal from the AS program and failure-free survival (FFS). The interobserver agreement was also evaluated. At a median follow-up time of 31 months (range, 6-80 months), 84 patients (62.2%) were participating in the AS program. In 2 multivariate models, the variables significantly associated with outcomes for both readers were the index lesion size (hazard ratio [HR], 2.34 and 3.13, respectively) and overall PI-RADS, v2, score (HR, 2.51 and 3.21, respectively). The interobserver agreement was higher for the overall Likert and PI-RADS, v2, scores. Overall, the PI-RADS, v2, score and index lesion size were strongly associated with FFS. Overall, the Likert and PI-RADS, v2, scoring systems have been confirmed to be useful, although further improvements are needed.

Suggested Reporting Guidelines to Improve Health-Related Social Work Research.

Suggested Reporting Guidelines to Improve Health-Related Social Work Research.

A Mobile Device App to Reduce Medication Errors and Time to Drug Delivery During Pediatric Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation: Study Protocol of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Crossover Trial.

BackgroundDuring pediatric cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), vasoactive drug preparation for continuous infusions is complex and time-consuming. The need for individual specific weight-based drug dose calculation and preparation places children at higher risk than adults for medication errors. Following an evidence-based and ergonomic driven approach, we developed a mobile device app called Pediatric Accurate Medication in Emergency Situations (PedAMINES), intended to guide caregivers step-by-step from preparation to delivery of drugs requiring continuous infusion. In a prior single center randomized controlled trial, medication errors were reduced from 70% to 0% by using PedAMINES when compared with conventional preparation methods.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to determine whether the use of PedAMINES in both university and smaller hospitals reduces medication dosage errors (primary outcome), time to drug preparation (TDP), and time to drug delivery (TDD) (secondary outcomes) during pediatric CPR when compared with conventional preparation methods.MethodsThis is a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled crossover trial with 2 parallel groups comparing PedAMINES with a conventional and internationally used drug infusion rate table in the preparation of continuous drug infusion. The evaluation setting uses a simulation-based pediatric CPR cardiac arrest scenario with a high-fidelity manikin. The study involving 120 certified nurses (sample size) will take place in the resuscitation rooms of 3 tertiary pediatric emergency departments and 3 smaller hospitals. After epinephrine-induced return of spontaneous circulation, nurses will be asked to prepare a continuous infusion of dopamine using either PedAMINES (intervention group) or the infusion table (control group) and then prepare a continuous infusion of norepinephrine by crossing the procedure. The primary outcome is the medication dosage error rate. The secondary outcome is the time in seconds elapsed since the oral prescription by the physician to drug delivery by the nurse in each allocation group. TDD includes TDP. Stress level during the resuscitation scenario will be assessed for each participant by questionnaire and recorded by the heart rate monitor of a fitness watch. The study is formatted according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Statement for Randomized Controlled Trials of Electronic and Mobile Health Applications and Online TeleHealth (CONSORT-EHEALTH) and the Reporting Guidelines for Health Care Simulation Research.ResultsEnrollment and data analysis started in March 2017. We anticipate the intervention will be completed in late 2017, and study results will be submitted in early 2018 for publication expected in mid-2018. Results will be reported in line with recommendations from CONSORT-EHEALTH and the Reporting Guidelines for Health Care Simulation Research .ConclusionsThis paper describes the protocol used for a clinical trial assessing the impact of a mobile device app to reduce the rate of medication errors, time to drug preparation, and time to drug delivery during pediatric resuscitation. As research in this area is scarce, results generated from this study will be of great importance and might be sufficient to change and improve the pediatric emergency care practice.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03021122; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03021122 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6nfVJ5b4R)

Overcoming the Tower of Babel in Medical Science by Finding the "EQUATOR": Research Reporting Guidelines.

You are hosting a journal club on chest pain management in the emergency department (ED) for colleagues and trainees in your department. Interested in understanding the history of cardiac biomarkers to evaluate ED patients with chest pain, you search PubMed using the combination of terms “cardiac biomarker”, “chest pain”, and “emergency department”. Your search nets no studies prior to 2002 which you doubt is accurate, so you take the old-fashioned approach and start flipping through the oldest issues of emergency medicine journals at your local medical school library. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The Adoption of International Sustainability Reporting Guidelines within a Mandatory Framework: Lessons from South Africa

Purpose: The aim of this paper is to explore the factors influencing the voluntary adoption of international sustainability and integrated reporting guidelines in addition to the regulated King III reports among publicly listed companies on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE). The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines are used as a proxy for sustainability reporting and the International Integrated Reporting Council’s (IIRC) Integrated Reporting Framework is the international guidance considered for integrated reporting. Design/methodology/approach: Hypotheses were evaluated using logistic regression analysis. Two equations were developed to predict the likelihood of firms’ subscribing to either GRI or the Integrated Reporting () Framework respectively. In addition to the independent variables related to the hypotheses, several control variables were included in both models based on findings from prior literature. We consider annual, sustainability and integrated reports issued for the financial year ended 2014. Findings: The results show a statistically and significant positive association between the adoption of the GRI’s guidelines and the level of transparency of non-financial disclosures and environmental sensitiveness. The application of the Framework is also associated with the level of a firm’s transparency score and with its respective analyst following which acts as a measure for capital markets requiring a high information environment. Research limitations/implications: This study is largely confined to a specific context, i.e. corporations listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE). However, the paper provides a basis for examining other contexts with mandated sustainability or integrated reporting traditions such as Norway, Hong Kong, Denmark etc. which could be used in further studies for cross-country comparisons. Furthermore, the findings are relevant for firms operating in Europe given the new directive by the EU parliament necessitating the inclusion of sustainability information within annual reports from 2017. Originality/value: This study contributes to the sustainability and integrated reporting research by exploring the drivers of international reporting frameworks within a context where such practices are locally regulated. Furthermore, it provides a possible explanation for the heterogeneity of integrated reporting quality in South Africa as underscored by previous authors. The paper is also illustrative of the key differences between sustainability and integrated reporting which are ordinarily examined separately in extant research.

CARE guidelines for case reports: explanation and elaboration document

BackgroundWell-written and transparent case reports (1) reveal early signals of potential benefits, harms, and information on the use of resources; (2) provide information for clinical research and clinical practice guidelines, and (3) inform medical education. High-quality case reports are more likely when authors follow reporting guidelines. During 2011–2012, a group of clinicians, researchers, and journal editors developed recommendations for the accurate reporting of information in case reports that resulted in the CARE (CAse REport) Statement and Checklist. They were presented at the 2013 International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, have been endorsed by multiple medical journals, and translated into nine languages. ObjectivesThis explanation and elaboration document has the objective to increase the use and dissemination of the CARE Checklist in writing and publishing case reports. Article Design and SettingEach item from the CARE Checklist is explained and accompanied by published examples. The explanations and examples in this document are designed to support the writing of high-quality case reports by authors and their critical appraisal by editors, peer reviewers, and readers. Results and ConclusionThis article and the 2013 CARE Statement and Checklist, available from the CARE website [www.care-statement.org] and the EQUATOR Network [www.equator-network.org], are resources for improving the completeness and transparency of case reports.

Corporate stakeholder responsiveness? Exploring the state and quality of GRI‐based stakeholder engagement disclosures of European firms

AbstractStakeholder engagement (SE) is recognized as a key process to align firm and stakeholder interests and to identify material content for sustainability reporting (SR). Research on SE quality in an SR context has, however, been largely neglected. This paper investigates the current state and quality of SE within SR within a sample of 55 sustainability reports issued by European firms that used the new Global Reporting Initiative's G4 Guidelines. It will focus on why, how, and with whom firms are involved in SE based on an SE disclosures analysis framework and investigate the extent to which reporting maturity influences the state of SE disclosures and SE quality. While SE seems common practice, many firms are failing to provide full disclosure on how stakeholders have been engaged in defining report content. Less than half of the studied reports contained clear disclosures on how firms had responded to stakeholder concerns. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Methodology and Reporting of Mobile Heath and Smartphone Application Studies for Schizophrenia.

The increasing prevalence of mobile devices among patients of all demographic groups has the potential to transform the ways we diagnose, monitor, treat, and study mental illness. As new tools and technologies emerge, clinicians and researchers are confronted with an increasing array of options both for clinical assessment, through digital capture of the essential behavioral elements of a condition, and for intervention, through formalized treatments, coaching, and other technology-assisted means of patient communication. And yet, as with any new set of tools for the assessment or treatment of a medical condition, establishing and adhering to reporting guidelines-that is, what works and under what conditions-is an essential component of the translational research process. Here, using the recently published World Health Organization mHealth Evaluation, Reporting and Assessment guidelines for evaluating mobile health applications, we review the methodological strengths and weaknesses of existing studies on smartphones and wearables for schizophrenia. While growing evidence supports the feasibility of using mobile tools in severe mental illness, most studies to date failed to adequately report accessibility, interoperability, costs, scalability, replicability, data security, usability testing, or compliance with national guidelines or regulatory statutes. Future research efforts addressing these specific gaps in the literature will help to advance our understanding and to realize the clinical potential of these new tools of psychiatry.

Hematology journals do not sufficiently adhere to reporting guidelines: a systematic review

Background Reporting guidelines and trial/review registration policies have been instituted in order to minimize bias and improve research practices. Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the policies of hematology journals concerning reporting guideline adoption and trial/review registration. Methods We performed a web-based data abstraction from the Instructions for Authors of 67 hematology journals catalogued in the Expanded Science Citation Index of the 2014 Journal Citation Reports to identify whether each journal required, recommended or made no mention of the following reporting guidelines: EQUATOR, ICMJE, CONSORT, MOOSE, QUOROM, PRISMA, STARD, STROBE, ARRIVE and CARE. We also extracted whether journals required or recommended trial or systematic review registration. We e-mailed editors three times to determine which types of studies their journal accepts. Results Forty-eight per cent (32/67) of hematology journals do not adhere to any reporting guidelines. For responding journals, the QUOROM statement, MOOSE, CARE and PROSPERO were the least often mentioned, whereas the ICMJE guidelines, CONSORT statement and general trial registration were most often mentioned. Discussion Reporting guidelines are infrequently required or recommended by hematology journals. Furthermore, few require clinical trial or systematic review database registration. A higher rate of adherence to reporting guidelines can prevent bias from entering the literature. Participation from all stakeholders, including authors and journal editors, to improve reporting guideline and policy practices is required.

PM 7/109 (2) Epitrix cucumeris, Epitrix papa, Epitrix subcrinita, Epitrix tuberis

Specific scopeThis Standard describes a diagnostic protocol for adults of Epitrix cucumeris, Epitrix papa, Epitrix subcrinita and Epitrix tuberis.Specific approval and amendmentFirst approved in 2011‐09.Revision approved in 2016‐01.

Making economic evaluations more helpful for treatment choices in haemophilia.

Poorly conducted economic evaluations have the potential to mislead both clinicians, leading to inappropriate treatment choices, and payers who must decide on the reimbursement of treatment costs. This paper reviews the methods used in economic evaluations in haemophilia and proposes standards for conducting and reporting such evaluations in the future. A systematic review of economic evaluations in haemophilia published since 2008 was conducted. The reporting and methods of the studies were assessed using the recently published Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Guidelines (CHEERS) checklist. The key methodological deficiencies in the studies were recorded. Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria, classified as follows: prophylaxis vs. treatment on-demand (five studies); use of bypassing therapy (six); immune tolerance induction (four); and other topics (six). In general, the quality of reporting was good. However, it was poorest for the CHEERS item of patient heterogeneity, with most studies lacking discussion of heterogeneity in the patient population. The main recurring methodological deficiencies were the evaluation of single episodes of care rather than entire treatment strategies; inadequate control for confounders when comparing treatment options; the frequent use of expert opinion to determine drug doses and treatment patterns; lack of consideration of patient heterogeneity; failure to identify patient subgroups; and the inadequate exploration of uncertainty in estimates. A set of 12 standards for future reporting and conduct of economic evaluations within haemophilia is proposed, with the objective of making such evaluations more relevant and reliable for those making treatment and reimbursement decisions in the future.

The role of different PI-RADS versions in prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance tomography assessment.

Background. Standardised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) guidelines for the assessment of prostate alterations were designed for the assessment of prostate pathology. Published by the ESUR in 2012, PI-RADS v1 was based on the total score of different MRI sequences with subsequent calculation. PI-RADS v2 was published by the American College of Radiology in 2015 and featured different assessment criteria for prostate peripheral and transitory zones.Aim. To assess the correlations of PI-RADS v1 and PI-RADS v2 with Gleason score values and to define their predictive values of the diagnosis of prostate cancer.Materials and methods. A retrospective analysis of 66 patients. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) value and the Gleason score (GS) were assessed. One the most malignant focal lesion was selected in the peripheral zone of each lobe of the prostate (91 in total). Statistical analysis was carried out applying SPSS software, v.23, p < 0.05.Results. Focal lesions assessed by PI-RADS v1 score: 10% – 1, 12% – 2, 41% – 3, 23% – 4, 14% – 5. Assessment applying PI-RADS v.2: 20% – 1, 7.5% – 2, 26%, 29.5%, and 17% were assessed by 3, 4, and 5 scores. Statistically relevant correlation was found only between GS and PI-RADS (p = 0.033).The positive predictive value of both versions of PI-RADS – 75%, negative predictive value of PI-RADS v1 – 46%, PI-RADS v2 – 43%.Conclusions. PI-RADS v1 was more statistically relevant in assessing the grade of tumour. Prediction values were similar in both versions

The Current Status of Quality of Reporting in Acupuncture Treatment Case Reports: An Analysis of the Core Journal in Korea.

Objectives The present study aimed to evaluate the overall quality of case reports concerning acupuncture treatment in Korea. Methods We selected a representative Korean journal and retrieved eligible case reports on acupuncture treatment published from 2009 to 2015. We assessed the quality of reporting based on CAse REport (CARE) and STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials of Acupuncture (STRICTA) guideline checklists. Results A total of 93 eligible case reports of acupuncture treatment were identified among the 107 articles screened. Overall quality of reporting in the case reports was generally acceptable (75.4% on CARE, 67.7% on STRICTA), but several crucial items remained substantially underreported. Conclusions Endorsement of the CARE and STRICTA guidelines is needed to improve the completeness of reporting. Our findings will be helpful in developing a more appropriate reporting guideline for case reports in acupuncture treatment.

Sustainable Logistics Network Modeling for Enterprise Supply Chain

With the expansion of the study about green logistics, sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) has appeared as a new concept in current economic circumstance. This paper studies the sustainability optimization of enterprise logistics network from a strategic perspective and proposes a multiobjective sustainable logistics optimization model considering three dimensions of sustainability: economy, environment, and society. In this model, the environment factor was measured with a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method based on Chinese Life Cycle Database (CLCD), while for social factors, Sustainability Reporting Guidelines (GRI) are utilized to quantify the social performance. Moreover, the model was solved with an adapted version of the ε‐constraint method named augment constraint algorithm (AUGMENCON) through GAMS software. The numerical experiment results of a computer manufacturer supply chain show that the proposed model is able to integrate all dimensions of sustainability and simultaneously prove the capability of AUGMENCON in providing a set of trade‐off solutions for the decision makers to make different decisions under different environment and social requirements.

Research Reporting Guidelines in Dentistry: A Survey of Editors.

The use of reporting guidelines has an important role in the development of health research, improving the quality and precision of the publications. This study evaluated how dental journals use reporting guidelines. All editors of dental journals registered on the 2013 Journal Citation Reports list (n=81) were invited to participate. The data were collected by a self-reported web-based questionnaire. Information about the profile of journal/editor and on the use of reporting guidelines by journals was gathered. Information/recommendations about the use of reporting guidelines were collected from the websites of all journals. Data were descriptively analyzed and frequencies were summarized. Thirty-four (42%) editors completed the questionnaire. Most journals are members of Committee on Publication Ethics (64.7%) and/or follow the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors recommendations (20.6%), while 26.5% are not members of any editorial group. Most editors are unfamiliar with the EQUATOR Network (55.9%), do not work full time (85.3%) and 88.2% have some income/payment. Most of them received educational training for this position (55.9%). The CONSORT Statement was endorsed by 61.8% of journals. Information from websites showed that 44.4% journals do not recommend any reporting guideline, 51.9% mention CONSORT Statement in the website and 28.4% only recommend the use of CONSORT Statement. There is clearly room for improving the use of reporting guidelines in dental journals. Broadening the understanding and the endorsement/adherence/implementation of reporting guidelines by journals may promote quality and transparence of published dental research.

Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines

IntroductionCase series have been a long held tradition within the surgical literature and are still frequently published. Reporting guidelines can improve transparency and reporting quality. No guideline exists for reporting case series, and our recent systematic review highlights the fact that key data are being missed from such reports. Our objective was to develop reporting guidelines for surgical case series. MethodsA Delphi consensus exercise was conducted to determine items to include in the reporting guideline. Items included those identified from a previous systematic review on case series and those included in the SCARE Guidelines for case reports. The Delphi questionnaire was administered via Google Forms and conducted using standard Delphi methodology. Surgeons and others with expertise in the reporting of case series were invited to participate. In round one, participants voted to define case series and also what elements should be included in them. In round two, participants voted on what items to include in the PROCESS guideline using a nine-point Likert scale to assess agreement as proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) working group. ResultsIn round one, there was a 49% (29/59) response rate. Following adjustment of the guideline with incorporation of recommended changes, round two commenced and there was an 81% (48/59) response rate. All but one of the items were approved by the participants and Likert scores 7-9 were awarded by >70% of respondents. The final guideline consists of an eight item checklist. ConclusionWe present the PROCESS Guideline, consisting of an eight item checklist that will improve the reporting quality of surgical case series. We encourage authors, reviewers, editors, journals, publishers and the wider surgical and scholarly community to adopt these.