Skip to main content

Table 1 Main outcomes

From: Poor reporting quality of observational clinical studies comparing treatments of COVID-19 – a retrospective cross-sectional study

Main results

STROBE Item description [5]

Item No

n (%) of adhering publications; total n = 147

Title and abstract

(a) Indicate the study’s design with a commonly used term

1a

67 (45.6)

(b) Provide in the abstract an informative and balanced summary

1b

102 (69.4)

Introduction

 Background/ rationale

Explain the scientific background and rationale for the investigation

2

24 (16.3)

 Objectives

State specific objectives, including any prespecified hypotheses

3

113 (76.9)

Methods

 Study design

Present key elements of study design early in the paper

4

61 (41.5)

 Setting

Describe the setting, locations, and relevant dates

5

108 (73.5)

 Participants

(a) Cohort study—Give the eligibility criteria, and the sources and methods of selection of participants and the follow-up

Case–control study—Give the eligibility criteria, and the sources and methods of case ascertainment and control selection. Give the rationale for the choice of cases and controls

Cross-sectional study—Give the eligibility criteria, and the sources and methods of selection of participants

6a

9 (6.1)

(b) Cohort study—For matched studies, give matching criteria and number of exposed and unexposed

Case–control study—For matched studies, give matching criteria and the number of controls per case

6b

17/40a (42.5)

 Variables

Clearly define all outcomes, exposures, predictors, potential confounders, and effect modifiers. Give diagnostic criteria

7

27 (18.4)

 Data sources/ measurement

For each variable of interest, give sources of data and details of methods of assessment (measurement). Describe comparability of assessment methods if there is more than one group

8

117 (79.6)

 Bias

Describe any efforts to address potential sources of bias

9

2 (1.4)

 Study size

Explain how the study size was arrived at

10

18 (12.2)

 Quantitative variables

Explain how quantitative variables were handled in the analyses. Describe which groupings were chosen and why

11

97 (66.0)

 Statistical methods

(a) Describe all statistical methods, including those used to control for confounding

12a

133 (90.5)

(b) Describe any methods used to examine subgroups and interactions

12b

6/40a (15.0)

(c) Explain how missing data were addressed

12c

41 (27.9)

(d) Cohort study—Explain how loss to follow-up was addressed

Case–control study—Explain how matching of cases and controls was addressed

Cross-sectional study—Describe analytical methods taking account of sampling strategy

12d

10/30a (33.3)

(e) Describe any sensitivity analyses

12e

34/36a (94.4)

Results

 Participants

(a) Report numbers of individuals at each stage of study

13a

93 (63.3)

(b) Give reasons for non-participation at each stage

13b

88 (59.9)

(c) Consider use of a flow diagram

13c

61 (41.5)

 Descriptive data

(a) Give characteristics of study participants and information on exposures and potential confounders

14a

79 (53.7)

(b) Indicate number of participants with missing data for each variable of interest

14b

39 (26.5)

(c) Cohort study—Summarise follow-up time

14c

13/26a (50.0)

 Outcome data

Cohort study—Report numbers of outcome events or summary measures over time

Case–control study—Report numbers in each exposure category, or summary measures of exposure

Cross-sectional study—Report numbers of outcome events or summary measures

15

139 (94.6)

Main results

(a) Give unadjusted and confounder-adjusted estimates and their precision. Make clear which confounders were adjusted for and why

16a

37 (25.2)

(b) Report category boundaries when continuous variables were categorised

16b

2/3a (66.7)

(c) If relevant, consider translating estimates of relative risk into absolute risk for a meaningful time period

16c

Not evaluated

 Other analyses

Report other analyses done

17

60/63a (95.2)

Discussion

 Key results

Summarise key results with reference to study objectives

18

35 (23.8)

 Limitations

Discuss limitations and potential bias of the study

19

5 (3.4)

 Interpretation

Give a cautious overall interpretation of results

20

95 (64.6)

 Generalisability

Discuss the generalisability (external validity) of the study results

21

40 (27.2)

Other Information

 Funding

Give the source of funding and the role of the funders

22

85 (57.8)

Overall adherence of all analysed publications

Mean ± standard deviation

all

45.6 ± 13.7

Median [interquartile range]

all

46.2 [34.6–57.1]

  1. The present table shows the number and percentage of adherence of the analysed publications to each individual STROBE item as well as the overall percentage adherence to the STROBE checklist. The item names and descriptions are taken from the original STROBE checklist [5]
  2. aIndicates number of applicable studies in case that the item was not applicable to all the studies analysed