Caulley, LisaCatalá-López, FerránWhelan, JonathanKhoury, MichelFerraro, JenniferCheng, WeiHusereau, DonAltman, Douglas G.Moher, David2020-05-082020-05-082020J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Mar 14;122:87-940895-4356http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/9966OBJECTIVES: Appropriate use of reporting guidelines of health research ensures that articles present readers with a consistent representation of study relevance, methodology, and results. This study evaluated the use of major reporting guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional analysis of health research articles citing four major reporting guidelines indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection (up to June 24, 2018). Two independent reviews were performed in a random sample of 200 articles, including clinical trials (N = 50), economic evaluations (N = 50), systematic reviews (N = 50), and animal research studies (N = 50). The use of reporting guidelines to guide the reporting of research studies was considered appropriate. Inappropriate uses included the use of the reporting guidelines as a tool to assess the methodological quality of studies or as a guideline on how to design and conduct the studies. RESULTS: Across all selected reporting guidelines, appropriate use of reporting guidelines was observed in only 39% (95% CI: 32-46%; 78/200) of articles. By contrast, inappropriate use was observed in 41% (95% CI: 34-48%; 82/200), and unclear/other use was observed in 20% (95% CI: 15-26%; 40/200). CONCLUSIONS: Reporting guidelines of health research studies are frequently used inappropriately. Authors may require further education around appropriate use of the reporting guidelines in research reporting.engAMhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Animal studiesClinical trialsEconomic evaluationsReporting guidelineResearch reportingSystematic reviewsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional321841261229410.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.03.0061878-5921Journal of Clinical Epidemiologyopen access