How Psychiatry Journals Support the Unbiased Translation of Clinical Research. A Cross-Sectional Study of Editorial Policies

Download statistics - Document (COUNTER):

Knueppel, Hannes; Metz, Courtney; Meerpohl, Joerg J.; Strech, Daniel: How Psychiatry Journals Support the Unbiased Translation of Clinical Research. A Cross-Sectional Study of Editorial Policies. In: PloS ONE 8 (2013), Nr. 10, e75995. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0075995

Repository version

To cite the version in the repository, please use this identifier: https://doi.org/10.15488/285

Selected time period:

year: 
month: 

Sum total of downloads: 220




Thumbnail
Abstract: 
Introduction: Reporting guidelines (e. g. CONSORT) have been developed as tools to improve quality and reduce bias in reporting research findings. Trial registration has been recommended for countering selective publication. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) encourages the implementation of reporting guidelines and trial registration as uniform requirements (URM). For the last two decades, however, biased reporting and insufficient registration of clinical trials has been identified in several literature reviews and other investigations. No study has so far investigated the extent to which author instructions in psychiatry journals encourage following reporting guidelines and trial registration. Method: Psychiatry Journals were identified from the 2011 Journal Citation Report. Information given in the author instructions and during the submission procedure of all journals was assessed on whether major reporting guidelines, trial registration and the ICMJE's URM in general were mentioned and adherence recommended. Results: We included 123 psychiatry journals (English and German language) in our analysis. A minority recommend or require 1) following the URM (21%), 2) adherence to reporting guidelines such as CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE (23%, 7%, 4%), or 3) registration of clinical trials (34%). The subsample of the top-10 psychiatry journals (ranked by impact factor) provided much better but still improvable rates. For example, 70% of the top-10 psychiatry journals do not ask for the specific trial registration number. Discussion: Under the assumption that better reported and better registered clinical research that does not lack substantial information will improve the understanding, credibility, and unbiased translation of clinical research findings, several stakeholders including readers (physicians, patients), authors, reviewers, and editors might benefit from improved author instructions in psychiatry journals. A first step of improvement would consist in requiring adherence to the broadly accepted reporting guidelines and to trial registration.
License of this version: CC BY 4.0 Unported
Document Type: Article
Publishing status: publishedVersion
Issue Date: 2013-10-16
Appears in Collections:Philosophische Fakultät

distribution of downloads over the selected time period:

downloads by country:

pos. country downloads
total perc.
1 image of flag of Germany Germany 134 60.91%
2 image of flag of United States United States 30 13.64%
3 image of flag of China China 10 4.55%
4 image of flag of Russian Federation Russian Federation 9 4.09%
5 image of flag of No geo information available No geo information available 7 3.18%
6 image of flag of Czech Republic Czech Republic 6 2.73%
7 image of flag of Japan Japan 4 1.82%
8 image of flag of Philippines Philippines 3 1.36%
9 image of flag of Canada Canada 3 1.36%
10 image of flag of Romania Romania 2 0.91%
    other countries 12 5.45%

Further download figures and rankings:


Hinweis

Zur Erhebung der Downloadstatistiken kommen entsprechend dem „COUNTER Code of Practice for e-Resources“ international anerkannte Regeln und Normen zur Anwendung. COUNTER ist eine internationale Non-Profit-Organisation, in der Bibliotheksverbände, Datenbankanbieter und Verlage gemeinsam an Standards zur Erhebung, Speicherung und Verarbeitung von Nutzungsdaten elektronischer Ressourcen arbeiten, welche so Objektivität und Vergleichbarkeit gewährleisten sollen. Es werden hierbei ausschließlich Zugriffe auf die entsprechenden Volltexte ausgewertet, keine Aufrufe der Website an sich.

Search the repository


Browse