Brianna Cheng, Emma Loeschnik, Anabel Selemon, Reza Hosseini, Jane Yuan, Harriet Ware, Xiaomeng Ma, Christian Cao, Isabel Bergeri, Lorenzo Subissi, Hannah C. Lewis, Tyler Williamson, Paul Ronksley, Rahul K. Arora, Mairead Whelan, Niklas Bobrovitz
{"title":"在 COVID-19 大流行期间，SARS-CoV-2 血清流行病学研究是否遵守 ROSES-S 报告指南。","authors":"Brianna Cheng, Emma Loeschnik, Anabel Selemon, Reza Hosseini, Jane Yuan, Harriet Ware, Xiaomeng Ma, Christian Cao, Isabel Bergeri, Lorenzo Subissi, Hannah C. Lewis, Tyler Williamson, Paul Ronksley, Rahul K. Arora, Mairead Whelan, Niklas Bobrovitz","doi":"10.1111/irv.13283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Complete reporting of seroepidemiologic studies is critical to their utility in evidence synthesis and public health decision making. The Reporting of Seroepidemiologic studies—SARS-CoV-2 (ROSES-S) guideline is a checklist that aims to improve reporting in SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiologic studies. Adherence to the ROSES-S guideline has not yet been evaluated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This study aims to evaluate the completeness of SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiologic study reporting by the ROSES-S guideline during the COVID-19 pandemic, determine whether guideline publication was associated with reporting completeness, and identify study characteristics associated with reporting completeness.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A random sample from the SeroTracker living systematic review database was evaluated. For each reporting item in the guideline, the percentage of studies that were adherent was calculated, as well as median and interquartile range (IQR) adherence across all items and by item domain. Beta regression analyses were used to evaluate predictors of adherence to ROSES-S.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>One hundred and ninety-nine studies were analyzed. Median adherence was 48.1% (IQR 40.0%–55.2%) per study, with overall adherence ranging from 8.8% to 72.7%. The laboratory methods domain had the lowest median adherence (33.3% [IQR 25.0%–41.7%]). The discussion domain had the highest median adherence (75.0% [IQR 50.0%–100.0%]). Reporting adherence to ROSES-S before and after guideline publication did not significantly change. Publication source (<i>p</i> < 0.001), study risk of bias (<i>p</i> = 0.001), and sampling method (<i>p</i> = 0.004) were significantly associated with adherence.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Completeness of reporting in SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiologic studies was suboptimal. Publication of the ROSES-S guideline was not associated with changes in reporting practices. Authors should improve adherence to the ROSES-S guideline with support from stakeholders.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":13544,"journal":{"name":"Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses","volume":"18 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11272216/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adherence of SARS-CoV-2 Seroepidemiologic Studies to the ROSES-S Reporting Guideline During the COVID-19 Pandemic\",\"authors\":\"Brianna Cheng, Emma Loeschnik, Anabel Selemon, Reza Hosseini, Jane Yuan, Harriet Ware, Xiaomeng Ma, Christian Cao, Isabel Bergeri, Lorenzo Subissi, Hannah C. Lewis, Tyler Williamson, Paul Ronksley, Rahul K. Arora, Mairead Whelan, Niklas Bobrovitz\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/irv.13283\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Complete reporting of seroepidemiologic studies is critical to their utility in evidence synthesis and public health decision making. The Reporting of Seroepidemiologic studies—SARS-CoV-2 (ROSES-S) guideline is a checklist that aims to improve reporting in SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiologic studies. Adherence to the ROSES-S guideline has not yet been evaluated.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study aims to evaluate the completeness of SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiologic study reporting by the ROSES-S guideline during the COVID-19 pandemic, determine whether guideline publication was associated with reporting completeness, and identify study characteristics associated with reporting completeness.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A random sample from the SeroTracker living systematic review database was evaluated. For each reporting item in the guideline, the percentage of studies that were adherent was calculated, as well as median and interquartile range (IQR) adherence across all items and by item domain. Beta regression analyses were used to evaluate predictors of adherence to ROSES-S.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>One hundred and ninety-nine studies were analyzed. Median adherence was 48.1% (IQR 40.0%–55.2%) per study, with overall adherence ranging from 8.8% to 72.7%. The laboratory methods domain had the lowest median adherence (33.3% [IQR 25.0%–41.7%]). The discussion domain had the highest median adherence (75.0% [IQR 50.0%–100.0%]). Reporting adherence to ROSES-S before and after guideline publication did not significantly change. Publication source (<i>p</i> < 0.001), study risk of bias (<i>p</i> = 0.001), and sampling method (<i>p</i> = 0.004) were significantly associated with adherence.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Completeness of reporting in SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiologic studies was suboptimal. Publication of the ROSES-S guideline was not associated with changes in reporting practices. Authors should improve adherence to the ROSES-S guideline with support from stakeholders.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13544,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses\",\"volume\":\"18 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11272216/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/irv.13283\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/irv.13283","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Adherence of SARS-CoV-2 Seroepidemiologic Studies to the ROSES-S Reporting Guideline During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Background
Complete reporting of seroepidemiologic studies is critical to their utility in evidence synthesis and public health decision making. The Reporting of Seroepidemiologic studies—SARS-CoV-2 (ROSES-S) guideline is a checklist that aims to improve reporting in SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiologic studies. Adherence to the ROSES-S guideline has not yet been evaluated.
Objectives
This study aims to evaluate the completeness of SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiologic study reporting by the ROSES-S guideline during the COVID-19 pandemic, determine whether guideline publication was associated with reporting completeness, and identify study characteristics associated with reporting completeness.
Methods
A random sample from the SeroTracker living systematic review database was evaluated. For each reporting item in the guideline, the percentage of studies that were adherent was calculated, as well as median and interquartile range (IQR) adherence across all items and by item domain. Beta regression analyses were used to evaluate predictors of adherence to ROSES-S.
Results
One hundred and ninety-nine studies were analyzed. Median adherence was 48.1% (IQR 40.0%–55.2%) per study, with overall adherence ranging from 8.8% to 72.7%. The laboratory methods domain had the lowest median adherence (33.3% [IQR 25.0%–41.7%]). The discussion domain had the highest median adherence (75.0% [IQR 50.0%–100.0%]). Reporting adherence to ROSES-S before and after guideline publication did not significantly change. Publication source (p < 0.001), study risk of bias (p = 0.001), and sampling method (p = 0.004) were significantly associated with adherence.
Conclusions
Completeness of reporting in SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiologic studies was suboptimal. Publication of the ROSES-S guideline was not associated with changes in reporting practices. Authors should improve adherence to the ROSES-S guideline with support from stakeholders.
期刊介绍：
Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses is the official journal of the International Society of Influenza and Other Respiratory Virus Diseases - an independent scientific professional society - dedicated to promoting the prevention, detection, treatment, and control of influenza and other respiratory virus diseases.
Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses is an Open Access journal. Copyright on any research article published by Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses is retained by the author(s). Authors grant Wiley a license to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher. Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
