Since 2006, there has been a growing effort within the scientific community to ensure transparency, reproducibility, and completeness in biomedical research reporting. These reporting guidelines have been developed to enhance the quality and trustworthiness of published studies. A recent study by researchers from The University of Tennessee-Knoxville and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee reports that there are different practices in the endorsement of, and adherence to these guidelines by leading biomedical journals. The study, led by Professor Peiling Wang, Professor Dietmar Wolfram, and Ms. Emrie Gilbert, was published in the journal PLOS ONE.
The research team examined the instructions for authors (IFAs) of hundreds of biomedical journals from prominent publishers to assess the extent to which these journals endorse and implement five major reporting guidelines: CONSORT, PRISMA, ARRIVE, CARE, and SPIRIT. The study reports there is a lack of agreement on what constitutes an endorsement; publishers need to implement tools for journals to ensure that the endorsed guideline adherence expectations are met.
The study found that only a small percentage of journals explicitly mention or require adherence to the major reporting guidelines in their IFAs. Among the hundreds of journals analyzed, only a few published reporting guidelines, and just a handful of the guidelines listed journals as endorsers. Furthermore, the endorsement of research guidelines by publishers and their associated journals varied widely, with some publishers showing better compliance than others.
To assess the impact of these guidelines on peer review processes, the researchers also analyzed a sample of journals with open peer review reports. They discovered that some reviewers do check for adherence to reporting guidelines, but this practice is not uniformly applied. This variability in guideline enforcement can affect the quality and transparency of published research.
Professor Wolfram explained, “The inconsistency in guideline endorsement and implementation highlights the need for a more standardized approach to ensure that all biomedical research adheres to high reporting standards.” The study’s findings suggest that journals and publishers must do more to inform authors about relevant guidelines and ensure their consistent application.
The researchers recommend several measures to improve adherence to reporting guidelines. These include clearer instructions for authors, mandatory submission of completed checklists, and greater involvement of editorial staff and peer reviewers in verifying compliance. By implementing these steps, journals can play a crucial role in enhancing the quality and reliability of biomedical research.
Professor Wang noted, “Further research is needed to study the experiences of authors and peer reviewers of the journals that endorsed reporting guidelines.” This is much needed to ensure the quality of the published research.
In conclusion, while the adoption of reporting guidelines has increased in recent years, significant gaps remain in their endorsement and implementation by prominent biomedical journals. Addressing these gaps is essential to ensure that biomedical research is reported in a transparent and complete manner, ultimately benefiting the scientific community and the public.
Journal Reference
Wang Peiling, Dietmar Wolfram, and Emrie Gilbert. “Endorsements of five reporting guidelines for biomedical research by journals of prominent publishers.” PLOS ONE, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0299806
About The Authors
Professor Peiling Wang is a full professor at the School of Information Sciences, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA. She has been teaching database design, data analytics, research methods, and information seeking for 30 years. Her research areas include relevance information search and seeking behavior, user-system interactions, learner-centered educational transformation, open science, open peer review, research reporting guidelines for biomedical publications, retractions, publication recommendation systems, and informetrics. She has authored or co-authored more than 75 peer-reviewed research articles in journals and conference proceedings. A frequent presenter at various conferences, she also chairs and serves on international conferences program committees. She serves as peer-reviewer for many journals and on several editorial boards including the Journal of Informetrics and in the past for the Library and Information Science Research. She can be reached by email at peilingw@utk.edu.
Professor Dietmar Wolfram is Associate Dean and Head of School in the School of Information Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA, where he has been a faculty member since 1990. His research interests include applied informetrics, information retrieval, scholarly communication, and education for the information professions. He has published widely on these topics with more than 100 peer-reviewed publications in international journals and conference proceedings. He serves on several journal editorial boards, and most recently served as Specialty Chief Editor for the Scholarly Communication section of Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics. He can be contacted at dwolfram@uwm.edu.
