Comparison of the Quality of Methodological Reports of Observational Articles Published in Iranian Nursing and Midwifery Journals Indexed in the Scopus Database during 2017-2021

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Siavash Asadzadeh Jahanabad 1
Razieh Bagherzadeh 2
Leila Dehghani 3
1 MSc Student in Medical Library & Information Sciences Bushehr University of Medical Sciences
2 Assistant Professor, Midwifery, Department of Midwifery, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Bushehr University of Medical Science, Bushehr, Iran
3 Assistant Professor; Medical Librarianship Group; Department of Paramedical Medicine; Bushehr University of Medical Sciences; Bushehr, Iran
10.48305/him.2024.42138.1144
Abstract
Introduction: Observational articles, as basic studies, in nursing-midwifery are of great importance; however, the quality of these articles has not been investigated, especially from the methodological view. This study endeavored to compare the quality of observational articles of nursing-midwifery journals indexed in Scopus database between the years 2017 and 2021.
Methods: In this comparative cross-sectional study, 479 observational articles on nursing and midwifery journals indexed in the Scopus database between the years 2017 and 2021 were reviewed. The data collection instrument was the STROBE checklist methodology section, which recorded the methodological characteristics of the articles reviewed.
Results: The average score of the methodology report of all observational studies was 15.10±2.46. The lowest percentage of reports were related to the management of possible bias cases (2.7%) and the method of dealing with incomplete data (5.6%). The average score of the methodology report in the year 2021 is similar to the year 2020 but significantly higher than in the year 2017 to the year 2019; the year 2020 is similar to the year 2019 and higher than the years 2017 and 2018; 2019 was similar to 2018 but higher than 2017 (p < .05).
Conclusion: The findings the study can help the editors and reviewers of Iranian nursing and midwifery journals to obtain more knowledge about the favorable characteristics and weaknesses of their journals, which can lead to a change in the policy of accepting articles for publication and improve the quality of their journals. It will also help researchers to report their research results accurately and with higher quality.

Highlights

Razieh Bagherzadeh: Google Scholar , PubMed

Leila Dehghani: Google Scholar , PubMed

Keywords
Checklist
Observational Studies
Nursing
Midwifery
Methodology
Subjects
  1. Mantzoukas S. The research evidence published in high impact nursing journals between 2000 and 2006: A quantitative content analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009;46(4):479–89.
  2. Mulhall A. In the field: notes on observation in qualitative research. J Adv Nurs. 2003;41(3):306–13.
  3. Fallahi Khoshknab M. The history of nursing research and the process of capacity-building in nursing research. Hayat J. 2013;19(3):1-4. [In Persian].
  4. Heshmatifar L, Molaee R, Nasr AR, Sharifian F. Review of the latest theoretical developments and qualitative research methodology in the field of instruction and teaching. J Res Teach. 2019;7(1):150-167.[In Persian].
  5. Khorasani P, Mohebi Z, Magharei M. Applications and Methodology of Case-study as a Community based Research in Nursing. Sadra Med J. 2020;8(2):165-180.[In Persian].
  6. Abedini-Baltork M, Mansoori S, Bagheri S, Asadnia M, Aghaee M. A Comparative study to Research Approaches in Iranian Medical Journals. Res Med Educ Med Educ. 2016;10(8):65-71.[In Persian].
  7. De Haes H, Bensing J. Endpoints in medical communication research, proposing a framework of functions and outcomes. Patient Educ Couns. 2009;74(3):287–94.
  8. Rahmani MR, Ayoobi F, Assar S, Jalalpour S, Rezaeian M. Presentation of the Guideline of Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology. J Rafsanjan Univ Med Sci. 2017;16(3):257–74.
  9. Wisdom JP, Cavaleri MA, Onwuegbuzie AJ, Green CA. Methodological reporting in qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods health services research articles. Health Serv Res. 2012;47(2):721–45.
  10. Papathanasiou AA, Zintzaras E. Assessing the quality of reporting of observational studies in cancer. Ann Epidemiol. 2010;20(1):67–73.
  11. Yarcheski A, Mahon NE, Yarcheski TJ. A descriptive study of research published in scientific nursing journals from 1985 to 2010. Int J Nurs Stud. 2012;49(9):1112–21.
  12. Bayrami R, Latifnejad Roudsari R. Quality of Reporting of Cohort Studies Investigating Preconception Risk Factors of Gestational Diabetes According to the STROBE Statement. Iran J Epidemiol. 2020;16(3):247-256.[In Persian].
  13. Shaghaghian S, Astaneh B. Adherence to the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology statement in observational studies published in Iranian medical journals. Iran J Public Health. 2020;49(8):1520.
  14. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Bull World Health Organ. 2007;85:867–72.
  15. Poorolajal J, Cheraghi Z, Irani AD, Rezaeian S. Quality of cohort studies reporting post the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. Epidemiol Health. 2011;33:e2011005.
  16. Limaye D, Limaye V, Pitani RS, Fortwengel G, Sydymanov A, Otzipka C, et al. Development of a quantitative scoring method for STROBE checklist. Acta Pol Pharm ñ Drug Res. 2018;75(5):1095–106.
  17. Heydari A, Hosseini M. Study of the Status of STROBE’s criteria in the reports of studies related to the prognosis of patients admitted to intensive care unit. Iran J Anaesthesiol Crit Care. 2018;39(4):39-50.[In Persian].
  18. Hopkins Z, Diaz O, Kaprive JF, Carlisle R, Moreno C, Bommareddy K, et al. Methods Reporting Quality and its Association with Methods Section Length: A Cross-sectional Assessment of STROBE and CONSORT Reporting Adherence in Top-cited Dermatology Journals. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2023;16(7):54.
  19. Sorensen AA, Wojahn RD, Manske MC, Calfee RP. Using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement to assess reporting of observational trials in hand surgery. J Hand Surg Am. 2013;38(8):1584–9.
  20. Bravo-Peña M, Barona-Fong L, Campo-López J, Arroyave Y, Calvache JA. Assessing the completeness of reporting of observational studies in Colombian Journal of Anesthesiology. Cross sectional study. Rev Colomb Anestesiol. 2017;45(1):31–8.
  21. Irani M, Bashtian MH, Khadivzadeh T, Ebrahimipour H, Nekah SMA. Weaknesses in the reporting of cross-sectional studies in accordance with the STROBE report (the case of congenital anomaly among infants in Iran): a review article. Iran J Public Health. 2018;47(12):1796.
  22. Nagarajan VB, Bhide S, Kanase HR, Potey AV, Firoz Tadavi F. Adherence of observational studies published in Indian journals to STROBE statement. J Assoc Physicians India. 2018;66(12):39–42.
  23. Parsons NR, Hiskens R, Price CL, Achten J, Costa ML. A systematic survey of the quality of research reporting in general orthopaedic journals. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(9):1154–9.
  24. Ramke J, Palagyi A, Jordan V, Petkovic J, Gilbert CE. Using the STROBE statement to assess reporting in blindness prevalence surveys in low and middle income countries. PLoS One. 2017;12(5):e0176178.
  25. Bastuji-Garin S, Sbidian E, Gaudy-Marqueste C, Ferrat E, Roujeau J-C, Richard M-A, et al. Impact of STROBE statement publication on quality of observational study reporting: interrupted time series versus before-after analysis. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e64733.
  26. Pouwels KB, Widyakusuma NN, Groenwold RHH, Hak E. Quality of reporting of confounding remained suboptimal after the STROBE guideline. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;69:217–24.
  27. Sharp MK, Tokalić R, Gómez G, Wager E, Altman DG, Hren D. A cross-sectional bibliometric study showed suboptimal journal endorsement rates of STROBE and its extensions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019;107:42–50.
  28. Sharp MK, Bertizzolo L, Rius R, Wager E, Gómez G, Hren D. Using the STROBE statement: survey findings emphasized the role of journals in enforcing reporting guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019;116:26–35.
  29. Adams AD, Benner RS, Riggs TW, Chescheir NC. Use of the STROBE checklist to evaluate the reporting quality of observational research in obstetrics. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(2):507–12.
  30. Agha RA, Lee S-Y, Jeong KJL, Fowler AJ, Orgill DP. Reporting quality of observational studies in plastic surgery needs improvement: a systematic review. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;76(5):585–9.