Publications
Detailed Information
Misclassification of study designs in the dermatology literature
Cited 8 time in
Web of Science
Cited 9 time in Scopus
- Authors
- Issue Date
- 2018-08
- Publisher
- Mosby Inc.
- Citation
- Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, Vol.79 No.2, pp.315-319
- Abstract
- Background: The appropriate classification of study designs is important for review and assessment of the relevant scientific literature as a basis for decision making; however, little is known about whether study designs have been appropriately reported in the dermatology literature. Objective: We aimed to validate the study designs in the dermatology literature and investigate discrepancies between author-reported and actual study designs. Methods: We reviewed all issues of 3 major dermatology journals from January to December 2016. A total of 295 original articles investigating associations between exposures and health outcomes were included for analysis. We used a validated algorithm to classify the study designs. Results: Among the 295 articles, 174 (59.0%) clearly mentioned the study design in the text. All interventional studies were correctly classified on the basis of study design (n = 42); however, 35 of 132 observational studies (26.5%) showed discrepancies between the author-reported and actual study design. When the author-reported design was a prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, or case-control study (n = 61), approximately half of the studies were misclassified by the authors (n = 30). Limitations: We analyzed only 3 journals in the dermatology field. Conclusions: Our findings revealed substantial discrepancies between author-reported and actual study designs in the dermatologic literature, particularly among observational studies.
- ISSN
- 0190-9622
- Language
- English
- Files in This Item:
- There are no files associated with this item.
- Appears in Collections:
Item View & Download Count
Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.