TY - JOUR T1 - Reporting guidelines: increasing standards in clinical research reporting JF - European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice JO - Eur J Hosp Pharm SP - 502 LP - 506 DO - 10.1136/ejhpharm-2012-000204 VL - 19 IS - 6 AU - Sally Hopewell AU - Iveta Simera Y1 - 2012/12/01 UR - http://ejhp.bmj.com/content/19/6/502.abstract N2 - Transparent and clear reporting of research is important to enable readers to understand how a study is conducted and to assess the validity and reliability of the study findings. Failure to adequately report research findings distorts the reality of how the research was actually conducted. It prevents clinicians from applying effective interventions and can result in considerable amounts of money invested in health research being wasted.1 Incomplete or inadequate reporting of health research also has far reaching ethical implications as the individuals who consent to participate in research, and agencies that provide funding support for these investigations, do so with the understanding that the work will make a contribution to the existing knowledge.2 Clearly, new knowledge that is not disseminated, or knowledge that is disseminated in a biased way, is not making a true contribution. Many research studies have identified serious reporting shortcomings in published health research. These problems are widespread and range from the failure to report and publish whole research studies depending on the nature of their research findings, publication bias',3 to the selective publication (or non-publication) of specific study outcomes ‘selective outcome reporting bias’.4 Even when all study outcomes are reported, the interpretation of the study results is sometimes distorted by the authors of the primary study.5 Other problems in the reporting of health research literature include the inadequate and misleading reporting of adverse events,6 the omission of information about study methods which would allow implementation of the intervention in clinical practice,7 and the omissions from, or misinterpretation of, results in the abstracts of study publications.8 Serious deficiencies in the reporting of research have been well documented across many medical specialties and various study designs. Systematic reviews of the health research literature are widely acknowledged as the best way … ER -