Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs can test the effectiveness of interventions and the outcomes of implementation strategies concurrently and accelerate the transformation of research results into routine practice. This paper introduced three types of effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs and corresponding reporting guidelines, including standards for reporting implementation studies, cluster randomized design and CONSORT 2010, stepped-wedge cluster randomized design and extended version CONSORT 2018, qualitative research and COREQ reporting guideline, and provide references for domestic researchers to produce research reports on effectiveness-implementation hybrid design.
The reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses is fundamental to the value of evidence in evidence-based medicine. As the internationally endorsed standard, the PRISMA statement and its extensive suite of extensions are crucial for standardizing reporting and enhancing transparency. However, a comprehensive, systematic understanding of its entire framework and profound challenges remains inadequate in the academic community. This review aims to systematically delineate and deeply analyze the complete PRISMA reporting guideline framework, evaluate its application value, uncover its implementation challenges, and forecast its future development directions. This paper traces PRISMA's evolution from its predecessor, QUOROM, to PRISMA 2020, highlighting key shifts in its core principles. It systematically constructs a multi-dimensional framework for the PRISMA family for the first time, categorizing its extensions by foundational versions, study design/analysis types, reporting process stages, disciplinary domains, and specific areas of focus, complemented by a forward-looking analysis of tools currently under development. The review delves into the deep-seated challenges in PRISMA's implementation, including misconceptions, inconsistent application, cross-disciplinary adaptability, and methodological limitations. It proposes that its future lies in balancing standardization with flexibility, enhancing globalized application, and deeply integrating with emerging technologies like artificial intelligence. The PRISMA framework has evolved from a mere reporting checklist into a core methodological architecture that promotes standardization throughout the entire evidence synthesis lifecycle. The continuous optimization and proper application of this framework are of critical theoretical and practical significance for enhancing the overall quality and impact of evidence synthesis research globally.
Chinese medicine case report, a special method, records the experience of practitioners and guides students to inherit and develop Chinese medicine. It can transfer a large amount of medical and humanistic information and contribute to the development of Chinese medicine. It is a literary style that has been widely accepted and helps to document and disseminate the culture of Chinese medicine. With the advent of big data and information, more Chinese medicine case reports have been published. However, many have insufficient quality to properly guide and apply in the clinical practice, which might be caused by little guidance of Chinese medicine case report standards published. This paper summarized the case report standards, synthesized and appraised the feasibility and problems specific for improving the quality of Chinese medicine case reports, and proposed suggestions and guidance for developing the standardization of Chinese medicine medical case reports.
Consensus reporting items for studies in primary care (CRISP) is a newly developed measurement tool developed abroad to standardize primary health care research, so as to improve the quality of reporting and enhance the applicability, comprehensiveness, transparency and operability of reporting. The report contains 24 Entries that follow the Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion (IMRaD) format, and is primarily concerned with describing the research team, the patients, the study subjects, the health status, the clinical experience, the health care team, the interventions, the study interventions, and the findings in the PHC study / implementation of results, etc. This article introduces and interprets the reporting guidelines to help researchers better understand and apply this statement to improve the quality of reporting in primary health care research
N-of-1 trials are prospective clinical randomized cross-over controlled trials with multiple rounds of trial phase alternation designed with regard to a single patient. N-of-1 trials can provide clinical decision-makers with high-level evidence of the comparison of effect of intervention measures. Recently, an international team composed of many scholars published a SPIRIT extension for N-of-1 trials list (SPENT 2019) on the BMJ, with the purposes of clarifying the content design and improving the integrity and transparency of N-of-1 trial protocols. This article showed a detailed interpretation of the 14 main extension sub-items of the SPENT 2019 list with specific cases, aiming to further standardize the publication of domestic N-of-1 trials.
CONSORT Group members update the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement by collecting relevant literatures to improve the reporting quality of randomised controlled trials. Recently, they have outlined CONSORT-Equity reporting standards, an extension to the CONSORT statement, which had been developed to improve the reporting of intervention effects in randomised trials where health equity is relevant. It will be helpful to improve social health equity or reduce social health inequities. This paper aims to introduce CONSORT-Equity and interprets its usage by a series of randomised trials where health equity is relevant.
Dose-response meta-analysis (DRMA) is one of the branches of meta-analysis, which has provided important evidence for clinical research. Since introducing into China, it has gained great attention. In order to improve the reporting quality of DRMA, Dr. Chang Xu et al. developed the reporting guideline for DAMA——G-Dose Checklist. It was published in Chinese Jouranl of Evidence-based Medicine in 2016. This paper interprets the checklists so as to promote the understanding and use of it.
ObjectiveTo select the key questions of the reporting quality of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis. MethodsA question pool about reporting quality of acupuncture therapy network meta-analysis was conducted by preliminary literature research and qualitative systematic review. A correspondence questionnaire was designed and the selection of key questions was carried out through two rounds of expert consultation using the Delphi method. ResultsA total of 21 key questions were selected for the network meta-analysis report standard of acupuncture, including whether to report details of acupuncture interventions (e.g., needle type, acupoints used, number of needles inserted, depth of needle insertion, retention time, needling techniques, and treatment duration), diagnostic criteria for diseases or traditional Chinese medicine syndromes, and qualifications of acupuncture practitioners. Of these, the only three key questions answered by the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and network meta-analysis (PRISMA-NMA) were summary, protocol and registration, and source of funding, while the remaining 19 were specific to acupuncture-related report standards. ConclusionThe conducted key question on reporting guideline of acupuncture network meta-analysis can improve the standardization and rigor of relevant research and better utilize its academic and clinical value.
The planning and reporting of synthesis questions in systematic review of intervention have a direct and important impact on the validity of the evaluation and the credibility of the results. Planning helps to reduce bias in the evaluation process and ensure the reproducibility of data synthesis. However, the field of systematic review currently lacks specific checklists and tools to guide how to plan and report these issues. The InSynQ (Intervention Synthesis Questions) checklist is a tool designed for planning and reporting data synthesis issues in systematic reviews of interventions. Its goal is to promote the standardization of systematic review methods, support systematic review participants in planning and comprehensively reporting data synthesis issues and structures, and provide a more accurate evidence base for clinical decision-making.