Show simple item record

Authordc.contributor.authorBennett, Derrick A. 
Authordc.contributor.authorBrayne, Carol 
Authordc.contributor.authorFeigin, Valery L. 
Authordc.contributor.authorBarker Collo, Suzanne 
Authordc.contributor.authorBrainin, Michael 
Authordc.contributor.authorDavis, Daniel 
Authordc.contributor.authorGallo, Valentina 
Authordc.contributor.authorJetté, Nathalie 
Authordc.contributor.authorKarch, André 
Authordc.contributor.authorKurtzke, John F. 
Authordc.contributor.authorLavados Germain, Pablo Manuel 
Authordc.contributor.authorLogroscino, Giancarlo 
Authordc.contributor.authorNagel, Gabriele 
Authordc.contributor.authorPreux, Pierre-Marie 
Authordc.contributor.authorRothwell, Peter M. 
Authordc.contributor.authorSvenson, Lawrence W. 
Admission datedc.date.accessioned2015-12-28T15:33:57Z
Available datedc.date.available2015-12-28T15:33:57Z
Publication datedc.date.issued2015
Cita de ítemdc.identifier.citationNeuroepidemiology 2015;45:113–137en_US
Identifierdc.identifier.otherDOI: 10.1159/000439132
Identifierdc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/135980
General notedc.descriptionArtículo de publicación ISIen_US
Abstractdc.description.abstractBackground: Incidence and prevalence studies of neurological disorders play an extremely important role in hypothesis- generation, assessing the burden of disease and planning of health services. However, the assessment of disease estimates is hindered by the poor quality of reporting for such studies. We developed the Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders (STROND) guideline in order to improve the quality of reporting of neurological disorders from which prevalence, incidence, and outcomes can be extracted for greater generalisability. Methods: The guideline was developed using a 3-round Delphi technique in order to identify the ‘basic minimum items’ important for reporting, as well as some additional ‘ideal reporting items.’ An e-consultation process was then used in order to gauge opinion by external neuroepidemiological experts on the appropriateness of the items included in the checklist. Findings: The resultant 15 items checklist and accompanying recommendations were developed using a similar process and structured in a similar manner to the Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist for ease of use. This paper presents the STROND checklist with an explanation and elaboration for each item, as well as examples of good reporting from the neuroepidemiological literature. Conclusions: The introduction and use of the STROND checklist should lead to more consistent, transparent and contextualised reporting of descriptive neuroepidemiological studies that should facilitate international comparisons, and lead to more accessible information for multiple stakeholders, ultimately supporting better healthcare decisions for neurological disorders.en_US
Lenguagedc.language.isoenen_US
Publisherdc.publisherKargeren_US
Type of licensedc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 Chile*
Link to Licensedc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/cl/*
Keywordsdc.subjectNeuroepidemiologyen_US
Keywordsdc.subjectIncidenceen_US
Keywordsdc.subjectPrevalenceen_US
Keywordsdc.subjectReporting qualityen_US
Keywordsdc.subjectGuidelineen_US
Títulodc.titleExplanation and elaboration of the standards of reporting of neurological disorders checklist: A guideline for the reporting of incidence and prevalence studies in neuroepidemiologyen_US
Document typedc.typeArtículo de revista


Files in this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 Chile
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 Chile