Reporting guidelines for primary care research - what are the needs?

Context: There is increasing interest in increasing the reliability and transparency of published health research.
Despite a plethora of reporting guidelines published in recent years, no specific guidance exists for the reporting
of primary care research. Objective: To assess how often the reporting of primary care research is problematic for
researchers and other end-users. Design: Online survey (Qualtrics), five-point Likert scales (Always – Never),
open questions. Setting: International, interdisciplinary primary care research community in late 2018.
Participants: 286 respondents (113 USA, 47 Australia, 14 UK, 12 the Netherlands). 153 family physicians, 158
with a doctoral degree, 204 researcher/investigators, 20 patients. Findings: 51 found research findings difficult
to implement about half the time due to the reporting. Qualitative studies were most problematic (63 said reports
were insufficient at least half the time). 56 said reports were insufficient for meta-analysis most of the time and
applying research to clinical practice, policy and teaching was also a problem at times. Reports did not always
outline the theory informing the research or patient involvement. Contextual information about patients,
practitioners, and health systems were emphasised as important issues. Implication(s) for practice: These initial
results demonstrate unmet needs that may be met by the development of primary care research reporting
guidelines. Our international group is working to develop Consensus Reporting Items for Studies in Primary Care.