The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalisability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September, 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles.18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies.A detailed explanation and elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the websites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. 18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed "Explanation and Elaboration" document is published separately and is freely available on the web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies. We convened a two-day workshop, in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalisability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. 18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the websites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalisability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. 18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the Web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover 3 main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors, to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to all 3 study designs and 4 are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available at http://www.annals.org and on the Web sites of PLoS Medicine and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

Uterine fibroid embolization: the utility of aortography in detecting ovarian artery collateral supply

PURPOSE: To retrospectively determine the sensitivity of ovarian artery (OA) visualization at aortography performed after uterine fibroid embolization (UFE) and, using OA arteriography as the reference standard, compare the extent of arterial flow to the uterus at aortography with selective ovarian arteriography, to establish the utility of aortography and ovarian arteriography in the routine practice of UFE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study received institutional review board approval with waiver of informed consent and was HIPAA compliant. Retrospective review of 1129 consecutive UFE patients (1072 with aortograms, 57 excluded; mean age, 44 years; range, 21-60 years) was performed to identify all visible OAs. Visible OAs were independently graded by two interventional radiologists according to extent of pelvic arterial flow. If selective arteriography was performed, a second grade was assigned based on assessment of the selective study. Descriptive and summary statistics were used for assessment by the senior observer, and interobserver variability was determined. RESULTS: Of 1072 UFE patients, 184 (17.2%) had at least one visible OA. Ten (0.8%) patients were identified at aortography with collateral OA supply to more than 10% of the uterus. In total, 251 OAs were visualized, and 157 of these were further evaluated with selective study. Sixty-two (5.8%) patients were identified at selective arteriography as having collateral OA supply. The sensitivity of aortography was approximately 18%. Interobserver concordance was high (kappa values of 0.81 and 0.90 for aortography and selective study, respectively), but not perfect. CONCLUSION: Aortography rarely helps identify patients with substantial residual OA supply to the uterus and is a poor predictor of the extent of that supply, and thus may be of limited utility in routine UFE.

Guidelines for the management of traumatic dental injuries. III. Primary teeth

Trauma to the primary dentition present special problems and the management is often different as compared with permanent teeth. An appropriate emergency treatment plan is important for a good prognosis. Guidelines are useful for delivering the best care possible in an efficient manner. The International Association of Dental Traumatology (IADT) has developed a consensus statement after a review of the dental literature and group discussions. Experienced researchers and clinicians from various specialties were included in the group. In cases in which the data did not appear conclusive, recommendations were based on the consensus opinion of the IADT board members. The guidelines represent the current best evidence based on literature research and professional opinion. In this third article out of three, the IADT Guidelines for the management of traumatic injuries in the primary dentition, are presented.

Guidelines for the management of traumatic dental injuries. II. Avulsion of permanent teeth

Avulsion of permanent teeth is the most serious of all dental injuries. The prognosis depends on the measures taken at the place of accident or the time immediately after the avulsion. Replantation is the treatment of choice, but cannot always be carried out immediately. An appropriate emergency management and treatment plan is important for a good prognosis. Guidelines are useful for delivering the best care possible in an efficient manner. The International Association of Dental Traumatology (IADT) has developed a consensus statement after a review of the dental literature and group discussions. Experienced researchers and clinicians from various specialties were included in the group. In cases in which the data did not appear conclusive, recommendations were based on the consensus opinion of the IADT board members. The guidelines represent the current best evidence based on literature research and professional opinion. In this second article of three, the IADT Guidelines for management of avulsed permanent teeth are presented.

Guidelines for the management of traumatic dental injuries. I. Fractures and luxations of permanent teeth

Crown fractures and luxations occur most frequently of all dental injuries. An appropriate treatment plan after an injury is important for a good prognosis. Guidelines are useful for delivering the best care possible in an efficient manner. The International Association of Dental Traumatology (IADT) has developed a consensus statement after a review of the dental literature and group discussions. Experienced researchers and clinicians from various specialties were included in the group. In cases where the data did not appear conclusive, recommendations were based on the consensus opinion of the IADT board members. The guidelines represent the current best evidence, based on literature research and professional opinion. In this first article of three, the IADT Guidelines for management of fractures and luxations of permanent teeth will be presented.

Pain management and the effect of guidelines in neonatal units in Austria, Germany and Switzerland

BACKGROUND: Painful invasive procedures are frequently performed on preterm infants admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The aim of the present study was to investigate current pain management in Austrian, German and Swiss NICU and to identify factors associated with improved pain management in preterm infants. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all Austrian, German and Swiss pediatric hospitals with an NICU (n = 370). Pain assessment and documentation, use of analgesics for 13 painful procedures, presence of written guidelines for pain management and the use of 12 analgesics and sedatives were examined. RESULTS: A total of 225 units responded (61%). Pain assessment and documentation and frequent analgesic therapy for painful procedures were performed more often in units using written guidelines for pain management and in those treating >50 preterm infants at <32 weeks of gestation per year. This was also the case for the use of opioid analgesics and sucrose solution. Non-opioid analgesics were used more often in smaller units and in units with written guidelines. There was a broad variation in dosage of analgesics and sedatives within all groups. CONCLUSION: Pain assessment, documentation of pain and analgesic therapy are more frequently performed in NICU with written guidelines for pain management and in larger units with more than 50 preterm infants at <32 weeks of gestation per year.