Reporting Guidelines for Survey Research: An Analysis of Published Guidance and Reporting Practices
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 2 August 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLoS Medicine
- Vol. 8 (8) , e1001069
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001069
Abstract
Research needs to be reported transparently so readers can critically assess the strengths and weaknesses of the design, conduct, and analysis of studies. Reporting guidelines have been developed to inform reporting for a variety of study designs. The objective of this study was to identify whether there is a need to develop a reporting guideline for survey research. We conducted a three-part project: (1) a systematic review of the literature (including “Instructions to Authors” from the top five journals of 33 medical specialties and top 15 general and internal medicine journals) to identify guidance for reporting survey research; (2) a systematic review of evidence on the quality of reporting of surveys; and (3) a review of reporting of key quality criteria for survey research in 117 recently published reports of self-administered surveys. Fewer than 7% of medical journals (n = 165) provided guidance to authors on survey research despite a majority having published survey-based studies in recent years. We identified four published checklists for conducting or reporting survey research, none of which were validated. We identified eight previous reviews of survey reporting quality, which focused on issues of non-response and accessibility of questionnaires. Our own review of 117 published survey studies revealed that many items were poorly reported: few studies provided the survey or core questions (35%), reported the validity or reliability of the instrument (19%), defined the response rate (25%), discussed the representativeness of the sample (11%), or identified how missing data were handled (11%). There is limited guidance and no consensus regarding the optimal reporting of survey research. The majority of key reporting criteria are poorly reported in peer-reviewed survey research articles. Our findings highlight the need for clear and consistent reporting guidelines specific to survey research. Please see later in the article for the Editors' SummaryKeywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting GuidelinesPLoS Medicine, 2010
- Questionnaires in clinical trials: guidelines for optimal design and administrationTrials, 2010
- Response rates in postal surveys of healthcare professionals between 1996 and 2005: An observational studyBMC Health Services Research, 2009
- A guide for the design and conduct of self-administered surveys of cliniciansCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association Journal, 2008
- Evidence-Based Approaches for the Ayurvedic Traditional Herbal Formulations: Toward an Ayurvedic CONSORT ModelThe Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 2008
- A Systematic Evaluation of the Impact of STRICTA and CONSORT Recommendations on Quality of Reporting for Acupuncture TrialsPLOS ONE, 2008
- Invited Commentary: The Art of Making Questionnaires BetterAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2006
- Inaccessible Novel Questionnaires in Published Medical Research: Hidden Methods, Hidden CostsAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2006
- Improving the Quality of Web Surveys: The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES)Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2004
- Reporting Survey Nonresponse in Academic JournalsInternational Journal for Quality in Health Care, 2002