Explanation and elaboration of the standards of reporting of neurological disorders checklist: A guideline for the reporting of incidence and prevalence studies in neuroepidemiology

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorBennett, Derrick
dc.contributor.authorBrayne, Carol
dc.contributor.authorFeigin, Valery
dc.contributor.authorBarker-Collo, Suzanne
dc.contributor.authorBrainin, Michael
dc.contributor.authorDavis, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorGallo, Valentina
dc.contributor.authorJetté, Nathalie
dc.contributor.authorKarch, André
dc.contributor.authorKurtzke, John
dc.contributor.authorLavados, Pablo
dc.contributor.authorLogroscino, Giancarlo
dc.contributor.authorNagel, Gabriele
dc.contributor.authorPreux, Pierre-Marie
dc.contributor.authorRothwell, Peter
dc.contributor.authorSvenson, Lawrence
dc.date.accessioned2016-05-24T15:00:02Z
dc.date.available2016-05-24T15:00:02Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Incidence and prevalence studies of neurological disorders play an extremely important role in hypothesis-generation, assessing the burden of disease and planning of health services. However, the assessment of disease estimates is hindered by the poor quality of reporting for such studies. We developed the Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders (STROND) guideline in order to improve the quality of reporting of neurological disorders from which prevalence, incidence, and outcomes can be extracted for greater generalisability. METHODS: The guideline was developed using a 3-round Delphi technique in order to identify the 'basic minimum items' important for reporting, as well as some additional 'ideal reporting items.' An e-consultation process was then used in order to gauge opinion by external neuroepidemiological experts on the appropriateness of the items included in the checklist. FINDINGS: The resultant 15 items checklist and accompanying recommendations were developed using a similar process and structured in a similar manner to the Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist for ease of use. This paper presents the STROND checklist with an explanation and elaboration for each item, as well as examples of good reporting from the neuroepidemiological literature. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction and use of the STROND checklist should lead to more consistent, transparent and contextualised reporting of descriptive neuroepidemiological studies that should facilitate international comparisons, and lead to more accessible information for multiple stakeholders, ultimately supporting better healthcare decisions for neurological disorders.
dc.identifier.citationNeuroepidemiology, 2015, vol.45, p.113-137
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11447/324
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000439132
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherS. Karger AG, Basel
dc.subjectNeuroepidemiology
dc.subjectIncidence
dc.subjectPrevalence
dc.subjectReporting quality
dc.subjectGuideline
dc.titleExplanation and elaboration of the standards of reporting of neurological disorders checklist: A guideline for the reporting of incidence and prevalence studies in neuroepidemiology
dc.typeArtículo

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Explanation and Elaboration of the Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders Checklist A Guideline for the Reporting of Incidence and Prevalence Studies in Neuroepidemiology.pdf
Size:
188.94 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Texto completo
Download

Collections

Artículos Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud

Implementado por OpenGeek Services