EN | TR
E-ISSN: 1307-5608
A Guide to Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery; Turkish Adaptation of STROCSS Criteria
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Research Article
VOLUME: 72 ISSUE: 3
P: 277-283
December 2019

A Guide to Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery; Turkish Adaptation of STROCSS Criteria

J Ankara Univ Fac Med 2019;72(3):277-283
DOI: 10.4274/atfm.galenos.2019.35220
Emre Demir 1
Yasemin Yavuz 2
Can Ateş 3
Mustafa Agah Tekindal 4
İbrahim Tayfun Şahiner 5
Gül Doğan 6
Güvenç Doğan 7
Ümran Muslu 8
Murathan Erkent 5
1. Hitit Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Biyoistatistik Anabilim Dalı, Çorum, Türkiye
2. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Biyoistatistik Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye
3. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Biyoistatistik Anabilim Dalı, Van, Türkiye
4. Selçuk Üniversitesi Veterinerlik Fakültesi, Biyoistatistik Anabilim Dalı, Konya, Türkiye
5. Hitit Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Çorum, Türkiye
6. Hitit Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Çocuk Cerrahisi Anabilim Dalı, Çorum, Türkiye
7. Hitit Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Anesteziyoloji ve Reanimasyon Anabilim Dalı, Çorum, Türkiye
8. Hitit Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Plastik, Rekonstrüktif ve Estetik Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Çorum, Türkiye
No information available.
No information available
Received Date: 03.08.2019
Accepted Date: 31.10.2019
Publish Date: 23.01.2020
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

ABSTRACT

Objectives:

In this study, it was aimed to adapt the 17-item (37 sub-items) STROCSS (Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery) criteria published in 2017 by a group of experts to improve the reporting quality of cohort studies in the surgical field and to establish a standard.

Materials and Methods:

STROCSS criteria were translated to Turkish by three authors (E.D., C.A., M.A.T.) separately, and a consensus was reached for the final version with Y.Y.’s guidance. The quality of reporting of 10 surgical cohort studies published in the TR index between 2010 and 2018, using a Turkish-adapted checklist, was evaluated by an academic physician (İ.Ş.T., G.D., Ü.M., G.D., M.E.) in five different surgical specialties. For the statistical evaluations, intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman graphs were used.

Results:

There was a significant correlation between pairwise evaluations in surgical specialties (p<0.001; p<0.001; p=0.007; p=0.001). The highest agreement was found between two different general surgeons; 0.963 (0.857-0.991). Among all academic physicians, the level of agreement was 0.947 (0.858-0.985) (p<0.001). According to the Bland-Altman graphs, there was a correlation between all observers.

Conclusion:

The adaptation of this checklist, which has become mandatory for the review of articles in the field of surgery by many international publishers, is intended to facilitate the reporting of studies in our country and to establish a standard in national publications.

Keywords: STROCSS, Reporting Guideline, Cohort Studies, Surgery

References

1
Agha RA, Borrelli MR, Vella-Baldacchino M, et al. The STROCSS statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery. International Journal of Surgery. 2017;46:198-202.
2
Agha RA, Borrelli MR, Vella-Baldacchino M, et al. A protocol for the development of the STROCSS guideline: Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery. International Journal of Surgery Protocols. 2017;5:15-17.
3
Agha RA, Fowler AJ, Saeta A, et al. SCARE Group. The SCARE Statement: Consensus-based surgical case report guidelines. Int J Surg. 2016;34:180-186.
4
Agha RA, Fowler AJ, Rajmohan S, et al. PROCESS Group. Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines. Int J Surg. 2016;36:319-323.
5
Gökmen D, Alkan A, Bakırarar B ve ark. Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi, 2018.
6
Agha RA, Lee SY, Jeong KJL, et al. Reporting quality of observational studies in plastic surgery needs improvement: a systematic review. Annals of plastic surgery, 2016;76:585-589.
7
Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, et al. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines, PLoS Med. 2010;7:e1000217.
8
Sinha IP, Smyth RL, Williamson PR. Using the Delphi technique to determine which outcomes to measure in clinical trials: recommendations for the future based on a systematic review of existing studies, PLoS Med. 2011;8:e1000393.
9
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370:1453-1457.
10
Boutron I, Altman DG, Moher D, et al. CONSORT statement for randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatments: a 2017 update and a CONSORT extension for nonpharmacologic trial abstracts, Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:40-47.
11
Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2011;64:383-394.
12
Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, for the CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010;340:c332.
13
Sunay D. Şengezer T, Oral M, ve ark. [The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel Group Randomized Trials], Euras J Fam Med. 2013;2:1-10.
14
Karaçam Z. [The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies], Anadolu Hemşirelik ve Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi. 2014;17:1.
15
Beller EM, Glasziou PP, Altman DG, et al. PRISMA for Abstracts: Reporting Systematic Reviews in Journal and Conference Abstracts. PLoS Med. 2013;10:e1001419.
16
Gülpınar Ö, Güçlü AG. [How to write a review article?] Turkish Journal of Urology. 39:44-48.
17
Kottner J, Audigé L, Brorson S, et al. Guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement studies (GRRAS) were proposed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:96-106.
18
Erdoğan S, Temel GO. [Turkish adaptation of the guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement studies (GRRAS) for clinical investigators], Çukurova Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi. 2016;41:613-621.
19
Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative. Clin Chem. 2003;49:1-6.
20
Genç Y, Albayrak R, Ateş C, et al. [Evaluation of Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies: Turkish Adaptation of STARD Criteria]. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası. 2012;65:137-146.  
2024 ©️ Galenos Publishing House