[Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration]

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

Can decision making in general surgery be based on evidence? An empirical study of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND: This empirical study analyzes the current status of Cochrane Reviews (CRs) and their strength of recommendation for evidence-based decision making in the field of general surgery. METHODS: Systematic literature search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Collaboration's homepage to identify available CRs on surgical topics. Quantitative and qualitative characteristics, utilization, and formulated treatment recommendations were evaluated by 2 independent reviewers. Association of review characteristics with treatment recommendation was analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Ninety-three CRs, including 1,403 primary studies and 246,473 patients, were identified. Mean number of included primary studies per CR was 15.1 (standard deviation [SD] 14.5) including 2,650 (SD 3,340) study patients. Two and a half (SD 8.3) nonrandomized trials were included per analyzed CR. Seventy-two (77%) CRs were published or updated in 2005 or later. Explicit treatment recommendations were given in 45 (48%). Presence of a treatment recommendation was associated with the number of included primary studies and the proportion of randomized studies. Utilization of surgical CRs remained low and showed large inter-country differences. The most surgical CRs were accessed in UK, USA, and Australia, followed by several Western and Eastern European countries. CONCLUSION: Only a minority of available CRs address surgical questions and their current usage is low. Instead of unsystematically increasing the number of surgical CRs it would be far more efficient to focus the review process on relevant surgical questions. Prioritization of CRs needs valid methods which should be developed by the scientific surgical community.

Potential clinical utility of polymerase chain reaction in microbiological testing for sepsis

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the potential improvement of antimicrobial treatment by utilizing a new multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay that identifies sepsis-relevant microorganisms in blood. DESIGN: Prospective, observational international multicentered trial. SETTING: University hospitals in Germany (n = 2), Spain (n = 1), and the United States (n = 1), and one Italian tertiary general hospital. PATIENTS: 436 sepsis patients with 467 episodes of antimicrobial treatment. METHODS: Whole blood for PCR and blood culture (BC) analysis was sampled independently for each episode. The potential impact of reporting microorganisms by PCR on adequacy and timeliness of antimicrobial therapy was analyzed. The number of gainable days on early adequate antimicrobial treatment attributable to PCR findings was assessed. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sepsis criteria, days on antimicrobial therapy, antimicrobial substances administered, and microorganisms identified by PCR and BC susceptibility tests. RESULTS: BC diagnosed 117 clinically relevant microorganisms; PCR identified 154. Ninety-nine episodes were BC positive (BC+); 131 episodes were PCR positive (PCR+). Overall, 127.8 days of clinically inadequate empirical antibiotic treatment in the 99 BC+ episodes were observed. Utilization of PCR-aided diagnostics calculates to a potential reduction of 106.5 clinically inadequate treatment days. The ratio of gainable early adequate treatment days to number of PCR tests done is 22.8 days/100 tests overall (confidence interval 15-31) and 36.4 days/100 tests in the intensive care and surgical ward populations (confidence interval 22-51). CONCLUSIONS: Rapid PCR identification of microorganisms may contribute to a reduction of early inadequate antibiotic treatment in sepsis.