Table 2 Users’ reasons for rating www.goodreports.org 7/10 or lower. Users could select more than one multiple-choice option
From: GoodReports: developing a website to help health researchers find and use reporting guidelines
Why did you rate www.goodreports.org a [e.g., 6]? | |
|---|---|
The checklist was too long | 62/159 (39%) |
The checklist was confusing | 51/159 (32%) |
The checklist items were not relevant to my work | 50/159 (31%) |
The website was confusing | 6/159 (4%) |
Other Free text answers • Too difficult to complete the list points • We have already done the Prisma checklist. These two checklists overlap each other. • No clue what you're talking about. Nobody asked me to do a checklist. • Some of the checklist items were confusing • Some items are not relevant • Already addressed in my paper. • Checklist assume too much about the nature of ‘good’ work • Check list is the same as the one on the journal guidelines • I completed the whole form and then when I clicked the button at the end it deleted all my answers • Some of the checklist were not relevant to my work and i taught it would have looked at my discussion in detail • The checklist is still rather broad • The checklist mentioned several items which were included in the article (e.g. corresponding author, subheadings) • Checklist mentioned that items were missing when they were present but with a slightly different spelling e.g. Conflicts of Interest instead of Conflicts of Interests • Not listed in the journal’s Instructions to authors • It was incorrect • Good • Some items were not available to my article. • 7 is a decent rating • Fair, the checklist differs with different countries • COREQ checklist was used. | 20/159 (13%) |