STROCSS 2019 Guideline: Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery.
By R. Agha, Ali Abdall-Razak, E. Crossley, Naeem Dowlut, Christos Iosifidis, Ginimol Mathew, Beamishaj, M. Bashashati, F. Millham, D. Orgill and 36 more. International Journal of Surgery, 2019
1,435 citations recorded by the source corpus.
INTRODUCTION The STROCSS guideline was developed in 2017 to improve the reporting quality of observational studies in surgery. Building on its impact and usefulness, we sought to update the guidelines two years after its publication. METHODS A steering group was formed to review the existing guideline and propose amendments to the 17-item checklist. A Delphi consensus exercise was utilised to determine agreement across a list of proposed modifications to the STROCSS 2017 guideline. An expert panel of 46 surgeons were invited to assess the proposed updates via Google Forms. RESULTS The response rate was 91% (n=42/46). High agreement was reached across all the items and the guideline was finalised in the first round. The checklist maintained 17-items, with modifications primarily considered to improve content and readability. CONCLUSIONS The STROCSS 2019 guideline is hereby presented as a considered update to improve reporting of cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies in surgery.
Subfields: Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Sociology and Political Science, Statistics and Probability
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/85150c9773a34026c0af2b2d6376aeed805a285a
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Sociology and Political Science
In Statistics and Probability
Citations in the corpus
- STROCSS 2021: Strengthening the reporting of cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies in surgery (2021, background): “STROCSS 2017 guidelines were updated in 2019; since its inception, STROCSS guidelines have been cited over 1000 times illustrating their acceptance within the surgical research community [8].”