Quality of reporting web-based and non-web-based survey studies: What authors, reviewers and consumers should consider

Abstract

BackgroundSeveral influential aspects of survey research have been under-investigated and there is a lack of guidance on reporting survey studies, especially web-based projects. In this review, we aim to investigate the reporting practices and quality of both web- and non-web-based survey studies to enhance the quality of reporting medical evidence that is derived from survey studies and to maximize the efficiency of its consumption.MethodsReporting practices and quality of 100 random web- and 100 random non-web-based articles published from 2004 to 2016 were assessed using the SUrvey Reporting GuidelinE (SURGE). The CHERRIES guideline was also used to assess the reporting quality of Web-based studies.ResultsOur results revealed a potential gap in the reporting of many necessary checklist items in both web-based and non-web-based survey studies including development, description and testing of the questionnaire, the advertisement and administration of the questionnaire, sample representativeness and response rates, incentives, informed consent, and methods of statistical analysis.ConclusionOur findings confirm the presence of major discrepancies in reporting results of survey-based studies. This can be attributed to the lack of availability of updated universal checklists for quality of reporting standards. We have summarized our findings in a table that may serve as a roadmap for future guidelines and checklists, which will hopefully include all types and all aspects of survey research.

Speech and language therapy for primary progressive aphasia across the UK: A survey of current practice

“…This survey conforms to the CHERRIES survey reporting checklist (Eysenbach ) and Turk et al .’s () extension to it. The Departmental Ethics Chair in Language and Cognition at University College London waived approval as the study met the criteria for service evaluation.…”

Calidad de las investigaciones basadas en encuestas: directrices para buenos informes

“…Son la base para poder pasar a los siguientes niveles de evidencia, permitiendo así, dar un enfoque integral a la investigación en salud donde no solo se valora la parte cuantitativa del proceso salud-enfermedad, sino que nos permite darle un enfoque más holístico integrando el aspecto biopsicosocial del ser humano. Además, las encuestas son útiles para abordar temas que son difíciles de evaluar; permitiendo construir constructos específicos al tema que se desea investigar 3,4 . Las principales limitaciones de este método son los sesgos de información y de medición que tienen que ver directamente con la elección y elaboración del instrumento, siendo el punto crítico la validez y confiabilidad, las que afectan directamente la generalización de los resultados de este tipo de estudios 5,6 .…”

“…En una investigación realizada por Bennett et al 3 sobre la evaluación de la calidad de informes de encuestas en el área médica, en 117 estudios publicados, se encontró que muchos criterios se reportaron deficientemente: pocos estudios proporcionaron la encuesta o las preguntas centrales (35%), informaron la validez o confiabilidad del instrumento (19%), definieron la tasa de respuesta (25%), discutieron la representatividad de la muestra (11%) o identificaron cómo manejaron los datos faltantes (11%); otros investigaciones encontraron resultados similares 4,7,8 . No se encontraron estudios que evalúen la calidad de los informes de encuestas en el área de Odontología.…”

Development of a national survey on foot involvement among people with psoriatic arthritis in Australia using a best practice approach: A survey development protocol

“…However, patient surveys have often been criticised for the lack of conceptual and methodological rigor [19]. Poorly designed surveys and inadequate reporting can lead to inappropriate application of research ndings in decision-making, healthcare, health policy and future research [19][20][21]. To overcome this, quality checklists and reporting guidelines have been developed in order to promote complete and transparent reporting among researchers and to indirectly improve the comprehensiveness and credibility of survey studies [22][23][24][25][26].…”

“…The checklists include the SUrvey Reporting GuidelinE (SURGE) for paper-based surveys [25] and the CHEcklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) for web-based surveys [26]. Despite the development of guidance for reporting of surveys nearly a decade ago, previous reviews of published survey research have found that key quality criteria relating to design, conduct and results were underreported in the majority of studies [19,20]. In addition, there is limited empirical evidence for optimal survey design [27,28].…”