SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.14 número4Supportive framework for teaching practice of student nurse educators: An open distance electronic learning (ODEL) contextMentors' and student nurses' experiences of the clinical competence assessment tool índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • En proceso de indezaciónCitado por Google
  • En proceso de indezaciónSimilares en Google

Compartir


African Journal of Health Professions Education

versión On-line ISSN 2078-5127

Resumen

GROSSMAN, E S. Reporting quality of Master of Medicine (MMed) mini-dissertations using the STROBE checklist. Afr. J. Health Prof. Educ. (Online) [online]. 2022, vol.14, n.4, pp.165-170. ISSN 2078-5127.  http://dx.doi.org/10.7196/AJHPE.2022.v14i4.1594.

BACKGROUND. The 2011 Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) directive to make a research component compulsory for specialist registration has been decried in some circles as encouraging low-quality research. OBJECTIVE. To assess the reporting quality of South African (SA) MMed mini-dissertations using the STROBE checklist. METHODS. A total of 100 monograph-format mini-dissertations reporting retrospective observational research were extracted from a pool of 335 mini-dissertations. Analysis of each was undertaken using a 24-point STROBE Statement checklist. Scoring was as follows: 1 = the item was compliant with STROBE recommendations; 0.5 = partially described; and 0 = not addressed at all. Satisfactory compliance was set at 66%, thus a STROBE score of 17-24 was considered satisfactory. Data were entered into an Excel spread sheet and analysed descriptively. RESULTS. STROBE item compliance for individual mini-dissertations was at a mean of 83.1%; range 50-97%; median 85% and mode 89%. Sixteen mini-dissertations were non-compliant, scoring below 17 as per the set threshold of 66%. This indicates an 84% satisfactory sample. Only Item 5 (Key settings and locations) was at 100% compliance. The four lowest scores were for STROBE items (9) Bias (29.5%); (10) Study size/power analysis (52%); (1) Title (69%) and (14) Missing data (69%). CONCLUSION. The majority of sampled mini-dissertations, evaluated as per STROBE recommendations, are transparently reported to allow the reader to follow what was planned, done, found and which conclusions were drawn. As such the results confer a measure of reporting quality on the SA MMed research endeavour. The use of dissertation templates, commonly using STROBE-type headings and prompts, might have contributed to the good scores obtained. Importantly, areas of weakness in the writing of the SA MMed mini-dissertations have been highlighted and show which items require attention.

        · texto en Inglés     · Inglés ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License Todo el contenido de esta revista, excepto dónde está identificado, está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons