The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies

4,803 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Sedentary time in adults and the association with diabetes, cardiovascular disease and death: systematic review and meta-analysis (2012, neutral): “Quality assessment The study team developed a quality assessment tool with reference to MOOSE (meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology) and STROBE (strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology) [9, 10].”
The Incidence and Prevalence of Ankle Sprain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Epidemiological Studies (2013, neutral): “Our rating system was a modified version of the STROBE guidelines for rating observational studies [30], and was based on 11 separate variables.”
CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010, positive): “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].”
Using clinical Natural Language Processing for health outcomes research: Overview and actionable suggestions for future advances (2018, neutral): “comprehensive guidance framework for NLP, similar to what has been proposed for the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology in the STROBE statement [89], and other initiatives (e.”