Explanation and elaboration of the standards of reporting of neurological disorders checklist: A guideline for the reporting of incidence and prevalence studies in neuroepidemiology
Author
dc.contributor.author
Bennett, Derrick A.
Author
dc.contributor.author
Brayne, Carol
Author
dc.contributor.author
Feigin, Valery L.
Author
dc.contributor.author
Barker Collo, Suzanne
Author
dc.contributor.author
Brainin, Michael
Author
dc.contributor.author
Davis, Daniel
Author
dc.contributor.author
Gallo, Valentina
Author
dc.contributor.author
Jetté, Nathalie
Author
dc.contributor.author
Karch, André
Author
dc.contributor.author
Kurtzke, John F.
Author
dc.contributor.author
Lavados Germain, Pablo Manuel
Author
dc.contributor.author
Logroscino, Giancarlo
Author
dc.contributor.author
Nagel, Gabriele
Author
dc.contributor.author
Preux, Pierre-Marie
Author
dc.contributor.author
Rothwell, Peter M.
Author
dc.contributor.author
Svenson, Lawrence W.
Admission date
dc.date.accessioned
2015-12-28T15:33:57Z
Available date
dc.date.available
2015-12-28T15:33:57Z
Publication date
dc.date.issued
2015
Cita de ítem
dc.identifier.citation
Neuroepidemiology 2015;45:113–137
en_US
Identifier
dc.identifier.other
DOI: 10.1159/000439132
Identifier
dc.identifier.uri
https://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/135980
General note
dc.description
Artículo de publicación ISI
en_US
Abstract
dc.description.abstract
Background: 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.
Explanation and elaboration of the standards of reporting of neurological disorders checklist: A guideline for the reporting of incidence and prevalence studies in neuroepidemiology