Browsing by Subject "Reporting guideline"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Reporting Essentials for DElirium bioMarker Studies (REDEEMS): Explanation and Elaboration
    (European Delirium Association, 2022-12-21) Amgarth-Duff, Ingrid; Hosie, Annemarie; Caplan, Gideon A.; Adamis, Dimitrios; Watne, Leiv Otto; Cunningham, Colm; Oh, Esther S.; Wang, Sophia; Lindroth, Heidi; Sanders, Robert D.; Olofsson, Birgitta; Girard, Timothy D.; Steiner, Luzius A.; Vasunilashorn, Sarinnapha M.; Agar, Meera; Psychiatry, School of Medicine
    Despite many studies of potential delirium biomarkers, delirium pathophysiology remains unclear. Evidence shows that the quality of reporting delirium biomarker studies is sub-optimal. Better reporting of delirium biomarker studies is needed to understand delirium pathophysiology better. To improve robustness, transparency and uniformity of delirium biomarker study reports, the REDEEMS (Reporting Essentials for DElirium bioMarker Studies) guideline was developed by an international group of delirium researchers through a three-stage process, including a systematic review, a three-round Delphi study, and a follow-up consensus meeting. This process resulted in a 9-item guideline to inform delirium fluid biomarker studies. To enhance implementation of the REDEEMS guideline, this Explanation and Elaboration paper provides a detailed explanation of each item. We anticipate that the REDEEMS guideline will help to accelerate our understanding of delirium pathophysiology by improving the reporting of delirium biomarker research and, consequently the capacity to synthesise results across studies.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    STROCSS 2021: Strengthening the reporting of cohort, cross-sectional and casecontrol studies in surgery
    (Elsevier, 2021) Mathew, Ginimol; Agha, Riaz; STROCSS Group; Surgery, School of Medicine
    Introduction: Strengthening The Reporting Of Cohort Studies in Surgery (STROCSS) guidelines were developed in 2017 in order to improve the reporting quality of observational studies in surgery and updated in 2019. In order to maintain relevance and continue upholding good reporting quality among observational studies in surgery, we aimed to update STROCSS 2019 guidelines. Methods: A STROCSS 2021 steering group was formed to come up with proposals to update STROCSS 2019 guidelines. An expert panel of researchers assessed these proposals and judged whether they should become part of STROCSS 2021 guidelines or not, through a Delphi consensus exercise. Results: 42 people (89%) completed the DELPHI survey and hence participated in the development of STROCSS 2021 guidelines. All items received a score between 7 and 9 by greater than 70% of the participants, indicating a high level of agreement among the DELPHI group members with the proposed changes to all the items. Conclusion: We present updated STROCSS 2021 guidelines to ensure ongoing good reporting quality among observational studies in surgery.