The purpose of this study was to review several kinds of checklists and statements of studies in human subjects, and to examine reporting methods in order to improve the quality of studies concerning hot springs.
For randomized controlled trials (RCTs), “the CONSORT Statement” (Moher et al.
JAMA 2001) consisting of 22 terms is the most well known checklist. In addition, different versions and new checklists have been developed depending upon the content of the studies (such as intervention methods) or field of the studies. There is also “the QUOROM Statement” (Moher et al.
Lancet 1999) for a systematic review (SR) of RCTs, “the TREND Statement” (Jarlais et al.
Am J Public Health 2004) for nonrandomized controlled trials, “the STROBE Statement” (Elm et al.
Ann Inter Med 2007) for observational studies, and “the MOOSE Checklist” (Stroup et al.
JAMA 2000) as a SR of observational studies. With regard to studies on hot springs, however, terms in the checklists and the statements described above are insufficient or inappropriate because of difficulties in performing such studies in a blinded manner, and the diversity of intervention methods, such as the quellen charakter.
Improvement of the quality of reports is important for validation of evidence. In order to improve the quality of assessments and reports of studies on hot springs, it may be necessary to develop a unique checklist based on the above-described statements and checklists.
抄録全体を表示