STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)— An Extension of the STROBE Statement

Abstract

Julian Little and colleagues present the STREGA recommendations, which are aimed at improving the reporting of genetic association studies.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic risk prediction studies: the GRIPS statement

“…The GRIPS statement was developed by a multidisciplinary panel of 25 risk prediction researchers, epidemiologists, geneticists, methodologists, statisticians and journal editors, seven of whom were also part of the STREGA initiative [12]. They attended a 2-day meeting in Atlanta, Georgia (US), in December 2009 that was sponsored by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on behalf of the Human Genome Epidemiology Network (HuGENet) [17].…”

“…Participants discussed a draft version of the guidelines that was prepared and distributed before the meeting. This draft version was developed on the basis of existing reporting guidelines, namely STREGA [12], REMARK [6], and STARD [13]. These were selected out of all available guidelines (see http://www.equator-network.org) because of their focus on observational study designs and genetic factors (STREGA), prediction models (REMARK) and test evaluation (REMARK and STARD).…”

“…In particular, the guidelines for genetic association studies (STREGA) have relevant items on the assessment of genetic variants, and the guidelines for observational studies (STROBE) have relevant items about the reporting of study design. The guidelines for diagnostic studies (STARD) and those for tumour marker prognostic studies (REMARK) include relevant items about test evaluation; the REMARK guidelines also have relevant items about risk prediction [6,[11][12][13]. However, none of these guidelines are fully suited to genetic risk prediction studies, an emerging field of investigation with specific methodological issues that need to be addressed, such as the handling of large numbers of genetic variants (from 10s to 10 000s) and flexibility in handling such large numbers in analyses.…”

Developing the “next generation” of genetic association databases for complex diseases

“…Despite the existence of established guidelines on the reporting of genetic association studies, that is, the STREGA guidelines [Little et al, 2009], missing data in publications remain an important issue that can come in different forms and shapes. The most common problems are undisclosed names and/or genetic association results (genotypes, allele counts, or summary statistics [ORs and CIs]) of polymorphisms that have been investigated.…”

Strengthening the Reporting of Genetic Risk Prediction Studies: The GRIPS Statement

“…11 They attended a two-day meeting in Atlanta, Georgia in December 2009 that was sponsored by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on behalf of the Human Genome Epidemiology Network (HuGENet). 16 Participants discussed a draft version of the guidelines that was prepared and distributed before the meeting.…”