Research Reporting Guidelines and Initiatives: By Organization
This chart lists the major biomedical research reporting guidelines that provide advice for reporting research methods and findings. They usually "specify a minimum set of items required for a clear and transparent account of what was done and what was found in a research study, reflecting, in particular, issues that might introduce bias into the research" (Adapted from the EQUATOR Network Resource Centre). The chart also includes editorial style guides for writing research reports or other publications.
Additional information about these guidelines and/or initiatives can be found using the Research Guidelines Search.
|AMA Manual of Style||A manuscript style guide for authors and editors.|
|ARRIVE: Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments||ARRIVE guidelines are intended to improve the reporting of research using animals – maximizing information published and minimizing unnecessary studies.
The guidelines, originally published in PLOS Biology, were developed in consultation with the scientific community as part of a National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement & Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3R) initiative to improve standards of reporting and ensure that the data from animal experiments can be fully evaluated and utilized. The guidelines are aimed primarily at scientists writing up their research for publication and for those who are involved in peer review.
Further information on the project, including the current list of endorsements by scientific journals, funding bodies, universities and learned societies can be found within their science pages.
Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG. Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol. 2010 Jun 29;8(6):e1000412. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412. Review. PubMed PMID: 20613859; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2893951.
|ASSERT: A Standard for the Scientific and Ethical Review of Trials||Proposed standard for the review and monitoring of randomized clinical trials by research ethics committees. Checklist incorporates certain elements of CONSORT, to ensure fulfillment of the requirements for scientific validity in the ethical conduct of clinical research. (18-item checklist)|
|Biosharing Reporting Guidelines||BioSharing works to map the landscape of community developed standards in the life sciences, broadly covering biological, natural and biomedical sciences. There are 70 reporting guidelines in BioSharing partly compiled by linking to BioPortal, MIBBI and the Equator Network.|
|CDE: Common Data Elements||A common data element is an element that is common to multiple data sets across different studies. This portal provides access to NIH-supported CDE initiatives and other tools and resources that can assist investigators developing protocols for data collection.|
|CDISC: Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium||Standards supporting the acquisition, exchange, submission and archive of clinical research data and metadata. Develops and supports global, platform-independent data standards that enable information system interoperability to improve medical research and related areas of healthcare.|
|CoBRA: Citation of BioResources in journal Articles||Members of the journal editors subgroup of the Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF) initiative developed a standardized and appropriate citation scheme for bioresources. Adopting the standard citation scheme will improve the quality of bioresource reporting and will allow their traceability in scientific publications, thus increasing the recognition of bioresources’ value and relevance to research.
Bravo E, Calzolari A, De Castro P, Mabile L, Napolitani F, Rossi AM, Cambon-Thomsen A. Developing a guideline to standardize the citation of bioresources in journal articles (CoBRA). BMC Med. 2015 Feb 17;13:33. doi: 10.1186/s12916-015-0266-y. PubMed PMID: 25855867.
|CONSORT: Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials||Evidence-based, minimum recommendations for reporting RCTs. Offers a standard way for authors to prepare reports of trial findings, facilitating their complete and transparent reporting, and aiding their critical appraisal and interpretation (25-item checklist).
CONSORT 2010 Statement (Update)
Extensions of the CONSORT statement for specific types of RCTs
Journals that support CONSORT
|CONSORT Plus||Extension of CONSORT requirements that imposes data integrity constraints not possible in text-based reporting.|
|COPE: Committee on Publication Ethics||Forum for editors of peer-reviewed journals to discuss issues related to the integrity of the scientific record. Supports and encourages editors to report, catalogue and instigate investigations into ethical problems in the publication process. All Elsevier journals become COPE members.|
|CSE: Council of Science Editors||Organization that promotes excellence in the communication of scientific information. Fosters networking, education, discussion, and exchange. Authoritative resource on current and emerging issues in the communication of scientific information.
CSE Editorial Policies and Endorsement
|EASE:European Association of Science Editors||Internationally-oriented community of individuals who share an interest in science communication and editing. Offers the opportunity to stay abreast of trends in the rapidly changing environment of scientific publishing, whether traditional or electronic.|
|EQUATOR: Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research||Umbrella organization that brings together developers of reporting guidelines, medical journal editors and peer reviewers, research funding bodies and other collaborators with mutual interest in improving the quality of research publications and of research itself.
Additional Resources & page of other Reporting Guidelines
Vandenbroucke JP. STREGA, STROBE, STARD, SQUIRE, MOOSE, PRISMA, GNOSIS, TREND, ORION, COREQ, QUOROM, REMARK... and CONSORT: for whom does the guideline toll?. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Jan 30. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 19181482.
Simera I, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF, Hoey J. Guidelines for reporting health research: the EQUATOR network's survey of guideline authors. PLoS Med. 2008 Jun 24;5(6):e139. PubMed PMID: 18578566; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2443184.
|FAME Editorial Guidelines: Forum for African Medical Editors||68-page guidelines.|
|GNOSIS: Guidelines for Neuro-Oncology: Standards for Investigational Studies||Guidelines to standardize the reporting of surgically based Phase 1 and Phase 2 neuro-oncology trials. The guidelines are summarized in a checklist format that can be used as a framework from which to construct a surgically based trial.
Chang S, Vogelbaum M, Lang FF, Haines S, Kunwar S, Chiocca EA, Olivi A, Quinones-Hinojosa A, Parsa A, Warnick R; American Association of Neurological Surgeons and Congress of Neurological Surgeons (AANS/CNS). GNOSIS: guidelines for neuro-oncology: standards for investigational studies--reporting of surgically based therapeutic clinical trials. J Neurooncol. 2007 Apr;82(2):211-20. Epub 2006 Dec 5. PubMed PMID: 17146595.
Chang SM, Reynolds SL, Butowski N, Lamborn KR, Buckner JC, Kaplan RS, Bigner DD. GNOSIS: guidelines for neuro-oncology: standards for investigational studies-reporting of phase 1 and phase 2 clinical trials. Neuro Oncol. 2005 Oct;7(4):425-34. PubMed PMID: 16212807; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1871726.
|GPP2: Good Publication Practice||Guidelines that encourage responsible and ethical publication of the results of clinical trials sponsored by pharmaceutical companies.
BioMedCentral & BMJ journals ask authors of industry-sponsored studies, or of papers in industry-sponsored supplements, to follow GPP.
Graf C, Battisti WP, Bridges D, Bruce-Winkler V, Conaty JM, Ellison JM, Field EA, Gurr JA, Marx ME, Patel M, Sanes-Miller C, Yarker YE; International Society for Medical Publication Professionals. Research Methods & Reporting. Good publication practice for communicating company sponsored medical research: the GPP2 guidelines. BMJ. 2009 Nov 27;339:b4330. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b4330. PubMed PMID: 19946142.
|GLISC: Grey Literature International Steering Committee||Guidelines for the production of scientific and technical reports and writing/distributing grey literature.|
|Instructions to Authors in the Health Sciences: Mulford Library, University of Toledo HSL||Journal titles listed in alphabetical order. Contains publishing guidelines for some journals. Indicates which journals follow CONSORT and/or other guidelines.|
|ICMJE: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors||Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals Vancouver Group.
|International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication||The aim is to improve the quality and credibility of scientific peer review and publication and to help advance the efficiency, effectiveness, and equitability of the dissemination of biomedical information throughout the world.|
|INANE: International Academy of Nursing Editors||International collaborative whose primary mission is to promote best practices in publishing and high standards in the nursing literature.|
|Mayfield Handbook of Technical & Scientific Writing||Handbook.|
|MIAME: Minimum Information About a Microarray Experiment||Describes the minimum information about a microarray experiment that is needed to enable the interpretation of the results of the experiment unambiguously and potentially to reproduce the experiment.
Brazma A, Hingamp P, Quackenbush J, Sherlock G, Spellman P, Stoeckert C, Aach J, Ansorge W, Ball CA, Causton HC, Gaasterland T, Glenisson P, Holstege FC, Kim IF, Markowitz V, Matese JC, Parkinson H, Robinson A, Sarkans U, Schulze-Kremer S, Stewart J, Taylor R, Vilo J, Vingron M. Minimum information about a microarray experiment (MIAME)-toward standards for microarray data. Nat Genet. 2001 Dec;29(4):365-71. PubMed PMID: 11726920.
Knudsen TB, Daston GP; Teratology Society. MIAME guidelines. Reprod Toxicol. 2005 Jan-Feb;19(3):263. PubMed PMID: 15686863.
|MIBBI: Minimum Information for Biological and Biomedical Investigations||Aims to increase the visibility of projects developing guidance for the reporting of aspects of biological and biomedical science.
|MOOSE: Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology||Proposal for reporting meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology.
Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, Moher D, Becker BJ, Sipe TA, Thacker SB. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000 Apr 19;283(15):2008-12. Review. PubMed PMID:10789670.
|Ophthalmology Study Design Worksheet #6 [no longer available on Web site]||Checklist for cross-sectional studies submitted to the journal, Ophthalmology (42-item checklist).|
|ORION Statement: Guidelines for Transparent Reporting of Outbreak Reports and Intervention studies Of Nosocomial infection||Items to include when reporting an outbreak or intervention study of a nosocomial organism (22-item checklist). Endorsed by a number of professional special interest groups and societies including the Association of Medical Microbiologists (AMM), British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy (BSAC) & the Infection Control Nurses' Association (ICNA) Research and Development Group.|
|PLOS Editorial and Publishing Policies: Reporting Guidelines for Specific Study Designs||PLOS requires that authors comply with field-specific standards for preparation and recording of data and select repositories appropriate to their field.|
|Practihc: Pragmatic Randomized Control Trials in Healthcare||European Union-funded converted action which provides open-access tools, training and mentoring to researchers in developing countries who are interested in designing and conducting pragmatic randomized controlled trials of healthcare interventions.|
|PRIMER Collaboration: PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF MEDICAL RESEARCH||Group that aims to improve the design of studies, their presentation, interpretation of results and translation into practice.|
|Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research||NIH held a joint workshop in June 2014 with the Nature Publishing Group and Science on the issue of reproducibility and rigor of research findings, with journal editors representing over 30 basic/preclinical science journals in which NIH-funded investigators have most often published. The workshop focused on the common opportunities in the scientific publishing arena to enhance rigor and further support research that is reproducible, robust, and transparent.
The journal editors at that workshop came to consensus on a set of principles to facilitate these goals, which a number of journals have agreed to endorse.
|PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses||The PRISMA Statement is to help authors improve the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. It has “focused on randomized trials, but PRISMA can also be used as a basis for reporting systematic reviews of other types of research, particularly evaluations of interventions. PRISMA may also be useful for critical appraisal of published systematic reviews, although it is not a quality assessment instrument to gauge the quality of a systematic review.”
The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations PRISMA Extension for Network Meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(11):777-784. doi:10.7326/M14-2385
The PRISMA Extension for Network Meta-analysis: Bringing Clarity and Guidance to the Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses PRISMA Extension for Network Meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(11):797-798. doi:10.7326/M15-0930
|QUOROM: QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses||Checklist that describes the group's preferred way to present the abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of a report of a meta-analysis.
Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet. 1999 Nov 27;354(9193):1896-900. Review. PubMed PMID: 10584742.
|RedHot: Reporting Data on Homeopathic Treatments (A Supplement to CONSORT)||Standard for reporting details of homeopathic treatments. 8-item checklist designed to be used by authors and editors when publishing reports of clinical trials.
Dean ME, Coulter MK, Fisher P, Jobst KA, Walach H. Reporting data on homeopathic treatments (RedHot): a supplement to CONSORT. J Altern Complement Med. 2007 Jan-Feb;13(1):19-23. PubMed PMID: 17309373.
|The REFLECT Statement:Reporting guidElines For randomized controLled trials for livEstoCk and food safeTy||Evidence-based minimum set of items for trials reporting production, health, and food-safety outcomes. (22-item checklist)
Sargeant JM, O'Connor AM, Gardner IA, Dickson JS, Torrence ME, Dohoo IR, Lefebvre SL, Morley PS, Ramirez A, Snedeker K. The REFLECT Statement: Reporting Guidelines for Randomized Controlled Trials in Livestock and Food Safety: Explanation and Elaboration. J Food Prot. 2010 Mar;73(3):579-603. PubMed PMID: 20202349.
Sargeant JM, O'connor AM, Gardner IA, Dickson JS, Torrence ME; consensus meeting participants, Dohoo IR, Lefebvre SL, Morley PS, Ramirez A, Snedeker K. The REFLECT Statement: Reporting Guidelines for Randomized Controlled Trials in Livestock and Food Safety: Explanation and Elaboration. Zoonoses Public Health. 2010 Jan 12. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 20070652.
|REMARK: REporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies||Guidelines for reporting of tumor marker studies.
McShane LM, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, Taube SE, Gion M, Clark GM; Statistics Subcommittee of NCI-EORTC Working Group on Cancer Diagnostics. REporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006 Nov;100(2):229-35. Epub 2006 Aug 24. PubMed PMID: 16932852.
|SAGER: Sex and Gender Equity in Research||Reporting of sex and gender information in study design, data analyses, results and interpretation of findings.
Heidari S, Babor T, De Castro P, Tort S, Curno M. Sex and gender equity in research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2016;1(2):1-9. doi: 10.1186/s41073-016-0007-6.
The Canadian Institute of Gender and Health has produced three online modules to improve the ability of health researchers and peer reviewers to account for sex and gender in the analysis of data from human participants.
|SMRS: Standard Metabolic Reporting Structures||Summary recommendations for standardization and reporting of metabolic analyses.
Lindon JC, Nicholson JK, Holmes E, Keun HC, Craig A, Pearce JT, Bruce SJ, Hardy N, Sansone SA, Antti H, Jonsson P, Daykin C, Navarange M, Beger RD, Verheij ER, Amberg A, Baunsgaard D, Cantor GH, Lehman-McKeeman L, Earll M, Wold S, Johansson E, Haselden JN, Kramer K, Thomas C, Lindberg J, Schuppe-Koistinen I, Wilson ID, Reily MD, Robertson DG, Senn H, Krotzky A, Kochhar S, Powell J, van der Ouderaa F, Plumb R, Schaefer H, Spraul M; Standard Metabolic Reporting Structures working group. Summary recommendations for standardization and reporting of metabolic analyses. Nat Biotechnol. 2005 Jul;23(7):833-8. PubMed PMID: 16003371.
|SQUIRE 2.0: Revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence||The SQUIRE Guidelines help authors write usable articles about quality improvement in healthcare so that findings may be easily discovered and widely disseminated. The SQUIRE website supports high quality writing about improvement through listing available resources and discussions about the writing process.|
|STARD: STAndards for the Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy||Aims to improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy, to allow readers to assess the potential for bias in the study (internal validity) and to evaluate its generalizability (25-item checklist).
Adopters of STARD: 1) Visit homepage; 2) Click "Adopters of STARD"
|STARE-HI: Statement on Reporting of Evaluation Studies in Health Informatics||Statement on Reporting of Evaluation Studies in Health Informatics: Explanation and Elaboration.
Brender J, Talmon J, de Keizer N, Nykänen P, Rigby M, Ammenwerth E. STARE-HI - Appl Clin Inform. 2013 Jul 24;4(3):331-58. doi: 10.4338/ACI-2013-04-RA-0024. PubMed PMID: 24155788; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3799207.
|STREGA: STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Associations||The purpose of the workshop was to develop evidence-based guidelines to promote clear reporting of genetic association studies, and reduce gaps in the evidence regarding potential methodological biases in such studies.|
|STRICTA (REVISED STRICTA): STandards for Reporting Interventions in Controlled Trials of Acupuncture||Designed as a supplement to CONSORT, which has led to improved reporting of trial design and conduct in general. Current plans are to revise STRICTA in collaboration with the CONSORT Group, such that STRICTA becomes an "official" extension to CONSORT.|
|STROBE: STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology||Aims to establish a checklist of items that should be included in articles reporting observational research.
These journals refer to STROBE in their Instructions for Authors.
|Structured Abstracts||National Library of Medicine (NLM) description of structured abstracts and how they are formatted for MEDLINE.|
|Trial Bank Project: University of California, San Francisco.||The Trial Bank Project has moved away from pursuing trial bank publishing to explore new research avenues.|
|WAME: World Association of Medical Editors||Global association of editors of peer-reviewed medical journals who seek to foster cooperation and communication among editors, improve editorial standards, promote professionalism in medical editing through education, self-criticism, and self-regulation, and encourage research on the principles and practice of medical editing|