↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of the Endorsement of the STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA) Statement on the Reporting Quality of Published Genetic Association Studies

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Epidemiology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of the Endorsement of the STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA) Statement on the Reporting Quality of Published Genetic Association Studies
Published in
Journal of Epidemiology, June 2016
DOI 10.2188/jea.je20150173
Pubmed ID
Authors

Darko Nedovic, Nikola Panic, Roberta Pastorino, Walter Ricciardi, Stefania Boccia

Abstract

The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) statement was based on the STrengthening the REporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement, and it was published in 2009 in order to improve the reporting of genetic association (GA) studies. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of STREGA endorsement on the quality of reporting of GA studies published in journals in the field of genetics and heredity (GH). Quality of reporting was evaluated by assessing the adherence of papers to the STREGA checklist. After identifying the GH journals that endorsed STREGA in their instructions for authors, we randomly appraised papers published in 2013 from journals endorsing STREGA that published GA studies (Group A); in GH journals that never endorsed STREGA (Group B); in GH journals endorsing STREGA, but in the year preceding its endorsement (Group C); and in the same time period as Group C from GH journals that never endorsed STREGA (Group D). The STREGA statement was referenced in 29 (18.1%) of 160 GH journals, of which 18 (62.1%) journals published GA studies. Among the 18 journals endorsing STREGA, we found a significant increase in the overall adherence to the STREGA checklist over time (A vs C; P < 0.0001). Adherence to the STREGA checklist was significantly higher in journals endorsing STREGA compared to those that did not endorse the statement (A vs B; P = 0.04). No significant improvement was detected in the adherence to STREGA items in journals not endorsing STREGA over time (B vs D; P > 0.05). The endorsement of STREGA resulted in an increase in quality of reporting of GA studies over time, while no similar improvement was reported for journals that never endorsed STREGA.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 39%
Student > Master 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Lecturer 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 50%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Unknown 5 28%