The quality of reports of medical and public health research from Palestinian institutions: A systematic review

Loai Albarqouni, Niveen Me Abu-Rmeileh, Khamis Elessi, Mohammad Obeidallah, Espen Bjertness, Iain Chalmers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)
56 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Over the past decade, there has been an increase in reports of health research from Palestine, but no assessment of their quality. We have assessed the quality of reports of Palestinian health research and factors associated with it.

DESIGN: This is a systematic review.

INCLUSION CRITERIA: We searched Medline and Scopus for reports of original research relevant to human health or healthcare authored by researchers affiliated with Palestinian institutions and published between January 2000 and August 2015 inclusive.

OUTCOMES: We used international guidelines to assess report quality, classifying as adequate those with ≥50% of items completely addressed.

RESULTS: Of 2383 reports identified, 497 met our inclusion criteria. Just over half (264; 55%) of these were published after 2010. 354 (71%) of first authors were affiliated with Palestinian institutions; 261 (53%) reports had coauthors from outside Palestine. The majority of the reports in our study were inadequately reported (342; 69%), and none had adequately reported all items. Of 439 observational studies, 11 (2.5%) reports provided adequate descriptions of eligibility criteria and selection procedures; 35 (8%) reported efforts to address potential sources of bias; 50 (11.4%) reported the basis for the study sample size; and funding sources were mentioned in 74 reports (17%). Higher reporting quality was associated with international affiliation of the first author (prevalence ratio (PR) 1.6 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.1)), international collaboration (PR 2.9 (95% CI 1.7 to 5.0)), international funding (PR 1.9 (95% CI1.5 to 2.5)), publication after 2005 (PR 3.9 (95% CI 1.8 to 8.5)) and four or more coauthors (PR 1.5 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.1)).

CONCLUSION: Although the quality of reports of Palestinian research has improved in recent years, it remains well below an acceptable standard. International reporting guidelines should be used to guide research design and improve the quality of reports of research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The systematic review protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registery (registration number: CRD42015027553).

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere016455
JournalBMJ Open
Volume7
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 9 Jun 2017

Fingerprint

Public Health
Research
Health
Guidelines
Sample Size
Patient Selection
Observational Studies
Publications
Research Design
Research Personnel
Delivery of Health Care

Cite this

Albarqouni, Loai ; Abu-Rmeileh, Niveen Me ; Elessi, Khamis ; Obeidallah, Mohammad ; Bjertness, Espen ; Chalmers, Iain. / The quality of reports of medical and public health research from Palestinian institutions : A systematic review. In: BMJ Open. 2017 ; Vol. 7, No. 6.
@article{2ea08221ae03458dad63a22636aac1d0,
title = "The quality of reports of medical and public health research from Palestinian institutions: A systematic review",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Over the past decade, there has been an increase in reports of health research from Palestine, but no assessment of their quality. We have assessed the quality of reports of Palestinian health research and factors associated with it.DESIGN: This is a systematic review.INCLUSION CRITERIA: We searched Medline and Scopus for reports of original research relevant to human health or healthcare authored by researchers affiliated with Palestinian institutions and published between January 2000 and August 2015 inclusive.OUTCOMES: We used international guidelines to assess report quality, classifying as adequate those with ≥50{\%} of items completely addressed.RESULTS: Of 2383 reports identified, 497 met our inclusion criteria. Just over half (264; 55{\%}) of these were published after 2010. 354 (71{\%}) of first authors were affiliated with Palestinian institutions; 261 (53{\%}) reports had coauthors from outside Palestine. The majority of the reports in our study were inadequately reported (342; 69{\%}), and none had adequately reported all items. Of 439 observational studies, 11 (2.5{\%}) reports provided adequate descriptions of eligibility criteria and selection procedures; 35 (8{\%}) reported efforts to address potential sources of bias; 50 (11.4{\%}) reported the basis for the study sample size; and funding sources were mentioned in 74 reports (17{\%}). Higher reporting quality was associated with international affiliation of the first author (prevalence ratio (PR) 1.6 (95{\%} CI 1.2 to 2.1)), international collaboration (PR 2.9 (95{\%} CI 1.7 to 5.0)), international funding (PR 1.9 (95{\%} CI1.5 to 2.5)), publication after 2005 (PR 3.9 (95{\%} CI 1.8 to 8.5)) and four or more coauthors (PR 1.5 (95{\%} CI 1.1 to 2.1)).CONCLUSION: Although the quality of reports of Palestinian research has improved in recent years, it remains well below an acceptable standard. International reporting guidelines should be used to guide research design and improve the quality of reports of research.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The systematic review protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registery (registration number: CRD42015027553).",
author = "Loai Albarqouni and Abu-Rmeileh, {Niveen Me} and Khamis Elessi and Mohammad Obeidallah and Espen Bjertness and Iain Chalmers",
note = "{\circledC} Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "9",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016455",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "6",

}

The quality of reports of medical and public health research from Palestinian institutions : A systematic review. / Albarqouni, Loai; Abu-Rmeileh, Niveen Me; Elessi, Khamis; Obeidallah, Mohammad; Bjertness, Espen; Chalmers, Iain.

In: BMJ Open, Vol. 7, No. 6, e016455, 09.06.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The quality of reports of medical and public health research from Palestinian institutions

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Albarqouni, Loai

AU - Abu-Rmeileh, Niveen Me

AU - Elessi, Khamis

AU - Obeidallah, Mohammad

AU - Bjertness, Espen

AU - Chalmers, Iain

N1 - © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

PY - 2017/6/9

Y1 - 2017/6/9

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Over the past decade, there has been an increase in reports of health research from Palestine, but no assessment of their quality. We have assessed the quality of reports of Palestinian health research and factors associated with it.DESIGN: This is a systematic review.INCLUSION CRITERIA: We searched Medline and Scopus for reports of original research relevant to human health or healthcare authored by researchers affiliated with Palestinian institutions and published between January 2000 and August 2015 inclusive.OUTCOMES: We used international guidelines to assess report quality, classifying as adequate those with ≥50% of items completely addressed.RESULTS: Of 2383 reports identified, 497 met our inclusion criteria. Just over half (264; 55%) of these were published after 2010. 354 (71%) of first authors were affiliated with Palestinian institutions; 261 (53%) reports had coauthors from outside Palestine. The majority of the reports in our study were inadequately reported (342; 69%), and none had adequately reported all items. Of 439 observational studies, 11 (2.5%) reports provided adequate descriptions of eligibility criteria and selection procedures; 35 (8%) reported efforts to address potential sources of bias; 50 (11.4%) reported the basis for the study sample size; and funding sources were mentioned in 74 reports (17%). Higher reporting quality was associated with international affiliation of the first author (prevalence ratio (PR) 1.6 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.1)), international collaboration (PR 2.9 (95% CI 1.7 to 5.0)), international funding (PR 1.9 (95% CI1.5 to 2.5)), publication after 2005 (PR 3.9 (95% CI 1.8 to 8.5)) and four or more coauthors (PR 1.5 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.1)).CONCLUSION: Although the quality of reports of Palestinian research has improved in recent years, it remains well below an acceptable standard. International reporting guidelines should be used to guide research design and improve the quality of reports of research.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The systematic review protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registery (registration number: CRD42015027553).

AB - OBJECTIVE: Over the past decade, there has been an increase in reports of health research from Palestine, but no assessment of their quality. We have assessed the quality of reports of Palestinian health research and factors associated with it.DESIGN: This is a systematic review.INCLUSION CRITERIA: We searched Medline and Scopus for reports of original research relevant to human health or healthcare authored by researchers affiliated with Palestinian institutions and published between January 2000 and August 2015 inclusive.OUTCOMES: We used international guidelines to assess report quality, classifying as adequate those with ≥50% of items completely addressed.RESULTS: Of 2383 reports identified, 497 met our inclusion criteria. Just over half (264; 55%) of these were published after 2010. 354 (71%) of first authors were affiliated with Palestinian institutions; 261 (53%) reports had coauthors from outside Palestine. The majority of the reports in our study were inadequately reported (342; 69%), and none had adequately reported all items. Of 439 observational studies, 11 (2.5%) reports provided adequate descriptions of eligibility criteria and selection procedures; 35 (8%) reported efforts to address potential sources of bias; 50 (11.4%) reported the basis for the study sample size; and funding sources were mentioned in 74 reports (17%). Higher reporting quality was associated with international affiliation of the first author (prevalence ratio (PR) 1.6 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.1)), international collaboration (PR 2.9 (95% CI 1.7 to 5.0)), international funding (PR 1.9 (95% CI1.5 to 2.5)), publication after 2005 (PR 3.9 (95% CI 1.8 to 8.5)) and four or more coauthors (PR 1.5 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.1)).CONCLUSION: Although the quality of reports of Palestinian research has improved in recent years, it remains well below an acceptable standard. International reporting guidelines should be used to guide research design and improve the quality of reports of research.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The systematic review protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registery (registration number: CRD42015027553).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85020637413&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016455

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016455

M3 - Article

VL - 7

JO - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

IS - 6

M1 - e016455

ER -