Reporting quality of survey research articles published in the pharmacy literature

被引:16
|
作者
Rybakov, Kiersten N. [1 ,5 ]
Beckett, Robert [2 ]
Dilley, Ian [3 ]
Sheehan, Amy Heck [4 ]
机构
[1] Purdue Univ, Coll Pharm, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
[2] Univ Manchester, Coll Pharm Nat & Hlth Sci, North Manchester, IN USA
[3] Eli Lilly & Co, CT Commercial Prod, Indianapolis, IN 46285 USA
[4] Purdue Univ, Coll Pharm, Fifth Third Bank Bldg,640 Eskenazi Ave, Indianapolis, IN 46202 USA
[5] Eli Lilly & Co, Global Med Informat, Indianapolis, IN 46285 USA
来源
关键词
Survey research methods; Research standards; Methodology; CONDUCT;
D O I
10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.01.005
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background: Survey research methodology is commonly used in the pharmacy literature and standards have been set forth for quality reporting. A systematic review to assess the reporting quality of survey research has only been completed for general medical literature. Objectives: The objective of this study is to examine the quality of survey research reporting published in the pharmacy literature and identify reporting areas researchers can focus on for increased transparency in survey research methodology. Methods: A cross-sectional study of survey research articles published in seven key pharmacy journals in 2016 was conducted using a published 30-item checklist instrument designed for the reporting quality surveys. Each article was evaluated by two independent study investigators and assigned a final score out of 30. Results: Out of 197 articles assessed for eligibility, 105 (53%) used survey research as the primary methodology and were included in the study. The average reporting score was 18.2 +/- 3.0 (range 10-25) out of 30, with the highest average scores reported for PharmacoEconomics (22.5), JMCP (20.4) and RSAP (19.8). Checklist items related to the quality of reporting survey research methodology with the highest compliance included: original reference cited for use of existing tools (100%), description of survey population and sample frame (90%); and reporting response rate (90%). Checklist items with low reporting included: psychometric properties for existing tools (14%); reliability and validity for new instruments (11%); analysis of nonresponse bias (8%); definition of complete versus partial responses (8%); methods of handling missing data (19%); and information about how non-respondents differ from respondents (14%). Conclusions: Survey research published in the pharmacy literature scored moderately on a published instrument designed for systematic appraisal of survey research reporting quality. Several areas for continued improvement exist for survey research reporting quality in the pharmacy literature.
引用
收藏
页码:1354 / 1358
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Research Guidelines Endorsed by Annals of Plastic Surgery to Improve the Quality of Published Articles
    Freshwater, M. Felix
    [J]. ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY, 2015, 75 (02) : 125 - 126
  • [32] European hospital pharmacy survey now published!
    Price, Richard
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL PHARMACY-SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2013, 20 (05): : 314 - 314
  • [33] Quality of reporting in abstracts of RCTs published in emergency medicine journals: a systematic survey of the literature suggests we can do better
    Germini, Federico
    Marcucci, Maura
    Fedele, Marta
    Galli, Maria Giulia
    Heath, Tevin
    Mbuagbaw, Lawrence
    Salvatori, Valentina
    Veronese, Giacomo
    Worster, Andrew
    Thabane, Lehana
    [J]. EMERGENCY MEDICINE JOURNAL, 2020, 37 (11) : 660 - 665
  • [34] AUTOMATION AND PUBLISHED MATERIALS FOR RESEARCH - PUBLISHED SOURCES, ARTICLES AND MONOGRAPHS
    GARRISON, L
    [J]. LIBRI, 1969, 19 (02): : 92 - 101
  • [35] Reporting of method of animal sacrifice in articles published in Indian journals
    Yadav, Jaykaran Preeti
    Kantharia, N. D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACOTHERAPEUTICS, 2011, 2 (02) : 125 - 127
  • [36] The reporting of monetary compensation in research articles
    Klitzman, Robert
    Albala, Ilene
    Siragusa, Joseph
    Nelson, Kristen N.
    Appelbaum, Paul S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON HUMAN RESEARCH ETHICS, 2007, 2 (04) : 61 - 67
  • [37] Reporting Quality of Single-Case Research Published in Learning Disabilities Journals
    Hott, Brittany L.
    Heiniger, Sarah
    Justus, Jasmine
    Randolph, Kathleen M.
    Al Shabibi, Amal
    Beasley, Brooki
    Frank, Kerry
    Mitchell, Wendy
    Tennell, Courtney
    Wester, Fanee
    [J]. LEARNING DISABILITIES RESEARCH & PRACTICE, 2023, 38 (03) : 224 - 238
  • [38] Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature
    Clarissa F. D. Carneiro
    Victor G. S. Queiroz
    Thiago C. Moulin
    Carlos A. M. Carvalho
    Clarissa B. Haas
    Danielle Rayêe
    David E. Henshall
    Evandro A. De-Souza
    Felippe E. Amorim
    Flávia Z. Boos
    Gerson D. Guercio
    Igor R. Costa
    Karina L. Hajdu
    Lieve van Egmond
    Martin Modrák
    Pedro B. Tan
    Richard J. Abdill
    Steven J. Burgess
    Sylvia F. S. Guerra
    Vanessa T. Bortoluzzi
    Olavo B. Amaral
    [J]. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 5
  • [39] Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature
    Carneiro, Clarissa F. D.
    Queiroz, Victor G. S.
    Moulin, Thiago C.
    Carvalho, Carlos A. M.
    Haas, Clarissa B.
    Rayee, Danielle
    Henshall, David E.
    De-Souza, Evandro A.
    Amorim, Felippe E.
    Boos, Flavia Z.
    Guercio, Gerson D.
    Costa, Igor R.
    Hajdu, Karina L.
    van Egmond, Lieve
    Modrak, Martin
    Tan, Pedro B.
    Abdill, Richard J.
    Burgess, Steven J.
    Guerra, Sylvia F. S.
    Bortoluzzi, Vanessa T.
    Amaral, Olavo B.
    [J]. RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND PEER REVIEW, 2020, 5 (01)
  • [40] Quality of articles published in predatory nursing journals
    Oermann, Marilyn H.
    Nicoll, Leslie H.
    Chinn, Peggy L.
    Ashton, Kathleen S.
    Conklin, Jamie L.
    Edie, Alison H.
    Amarasekara, Sathya
    Williams, Brittany L.
    [J]. NURSING OUTLOOK, 2018, 66 (01) : 4 - 10