Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration.

By Jan P. Vandenbroucke, E. von Elm, Douglas G. Altman, P. Gøtzsche, C. Mulrow, Stuart J. Pocock, Charles Poole, James J. Schlesselman, Matthias Egger. International Journal of Surgery, 2007

2,675 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4a7d918ba7a71eefda854d217c696b9443e22d1a

How researchers see this paper

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

In General Health Professions

Ewout W. Steyerberg

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Interpretation and Impact of Real-World Clinical Data for the Practicing Clinician (2018, background): “ology) provide a reporting standard for observational studies [54].”
Epidemiology of traumatic brain injury in Europe (2015, methodology): “We based the evaluation of methodological quality on five elements of the STROBE checklist [39] which were most relevant to the quality of reported incidence and mortality rates: study design, setting, participants, data sources/measurement and study size.”