首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health >Reporting Guidelines for Community-Based Participatory Research Did Not Improve the Reporting Quality of Published Studies: A Systematic Review of Studies on Smoking Cessation
【2h】

Reporting Guidelines for Community-Based Participatory Research Did Not Improve the Reporting Quality of Published Studies: A Systematic Review of Studies on Smoking Cessation

机译:基于社区的参与性研究的报告指南并未提高已发表研究的报告质量:吸烟戒断研究的系统评价

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of a 2010 community-based participatory research (CBPR) reporting guideline on the quality of reporting a CBPR on smoking cessation. We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases and included articles published up to December 2019 (PROSPERO: CRD42019111668). We assessed reporting quality using the 13-item checklist. Of the 80 articles identified, 42 (53%) were published after 2010. The overall reporting quality before and after 2010 was poor and did not differ significantly (mean difference: 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.21 to 1.53). The total reporting scores of the studies did not differ significantly according to the effect size of the intervention (beta coefficient: −2.86, 95% CI: −5.77 to 0.04). This study demonstrates the need to improve the quality of reporting CBPRs. We recommend that journal editors endorse the CBPR reporting guideline to encourage its use by more researchers.
机译:这项研究的目的是评估2010年基于社区的参与性研究(CBPR)报告指南对报告戒烟的质量的影响。我们搜索了MEDLINE,Embase,Cochrane对照试验中央注册系统(CENTRAL),PsycINFO和护理及相关健康文献累积索引(CINAHL)数据库,并纳入了截至2019年12月的文章(PROSPERO:CRD42019111668)。我们使用13个项目清单评估了报告质量。在所确定的80篇文章中,有42篇(53%)在2010年之后发表。2010年之前和之后的总体报告质量较差且差异不显着(平均差异:0.66,95%置信区间[CI]:-0.21至1.53) 。根据干预效果的大小,研究的总报告得分没有显着差异(β系数:-2.86,95%CI:-5.77至0.04)。这项研究表明需要提高报告CBPR的质量。我们建议期刊编辑认可CBPR报告指南,以鼓励更多研究人员使用它。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号