Table 2.
Percentage of items in the STROBE checklist which were addressed in cohort, case control, and cross-sectional studies published in four top scientific occupational journals in 2017
| Item | Recommendation | Reported n (%) | Not reported n (%) | Not applicable n (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Title and abstract | ||||
| 1a | Indicate the study’s design with a commonly used term in the title or the abstract | 39 (65.0) | 21 (35.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 1b | Provide in the abstract an informative and balanced summary of what was done and what was found | 45 (75.0) | 15 (25.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| Introduction | ||||
| 2 | Explain the scientific background and rationale for the investigation being reported | 60 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 3 | State specific objectives, including any pre-specified hypotheses | 53 (88.3) | 7 (11.7) | 0 (0.0) |
| Methods | ||||
| 4 | Present key elements of study design early in the paper | 31 (51.7) | 29 (48.3) | 0 (0.0) |
| 5 | Describe the setting, locations, and relevant dates, including periods of recruitment, exposure, follow-up, and data collection | 54 (90.0) | 6 (10.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 6a | Give the eligibility criteria | 51 (85.0) | 7 (11.7) | 2 (3.3) |
| 6b | Describe methods of follow-up | 56 (93.3) | 4 (6.7) | 0 (0.0) |
| 6c | Give matching criteria | 7 (11.7) | 3 (5) | 50 (83.3) |
| 6d | Give number of exposed and unexposed in matched studies | 4 (6.7) | 4 (6.7) | 52 (86.7) |
| 7a | Clearly, define all outcomes | 60 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 7b | Clearly, define all exposures | 53 (88.3) | 6 (10.0) | 1 (1.7) |
| 7c | Clearly, define all predictors | 55 (91.7) | 3 (5.0) | 2 (3.3) |
| 7d | Clearly, define all potential confounders | 41 (68.3) | 19 (31.7) | 0 (0.0) |
| 7e | Clearly, define all effect modifiers | 25 (41.7) | 35 (58.3) | 0 (0.0) |
| 8a | give sources of data | 60 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 8b | details of methods of assessment (measurement) | 52 (86.7) | 8 (13.3) | 0 (0.0) |
| 9 | Describe any efforts to address potential sources of bias | 20 (33.3) | 40 (66.7) | 0 (0.0) |
| 10 | Explain how the study size was arrived at | 21 (35.0) | 22 (36.7) | 17 (28.3) |
| 11 | If applicable, describe which groupings were chosen and why | 46 (76.7) | 9 (15.0) | 5 (8.3) |
| 12a | Describe all statistical methods, including those used to control for confounding | 60 (100) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 12b | Describe all statistical software | 38 (63.3) | 22 (36.7) | 0 (0.0) |
| 12c | Describe any methods used to examine subgroups and interactions | 13 (21.7) | 45 (75.0) | 2 (3.3) |
| 12d | Explain how missing data were addressed | 29 (48.3) | 29 (48.3) | 2 (3.3) |
| 12e | If applicable, explain how loss to follow-up was addressed | 23 (38.3) | 24 (40) | 13 (21.7) |
| 12f | Describe any sensitivity analyses | 5 (8.3) | 55 (91.7) | 0 (0.0) |
| Results | ||||
| 13a | Report numbers of individuals at each stage of study | 28 (46.7) | 26 (43.3) | 6 (10.0) |
| 13b | Give reasons for non-participation at each stage | 4 (6.7) | 56 (93.3) | 0 (0.0) |
| 13c | Consider use of a flow diagram | 28 (46.7) | 32 (53.3) | 0 (0.0) |
| 14a | Give characteristics of study participants | 44 (73.3) | 16 (26.7) | 0 (0.0) |
| 14b | Indicate number of participants with missing data for each variable of interest | 8 (13.3) | 48 (80.0) | 4 (6.7) |
| 14c | Summarise follow-up time (e.g., average and total amount) | 21 (35.0) | 38 (63.3) | 1 (1.7) |
| 15 | Report numbers of outcome events or summary measures | 60 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 16a | Give unadjusted estimates | 36 (60.0) | 24 (40.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 16b | Give confounder-adjusted estimates | 26 (43.3) | 34 (56.7) | 0 (0.0) |
| 16c | Give estimates precision/confidence interval | 54 (90.0) | 6 (10.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 16d | Report category boundaries when continuous variables were categorized | 48 (80.0) | 4 (6.7) | 8 (13.3) |
| 16e | If relevant, consider translating estimates of relative risk into absolute risk for a meaningful time period | 14 (23.3) | 34 (56.7) | 12 (20.0) |
| 17 | Report other analyses done—e.g. analyses of subgroups and interactions and sensitivity analyses | 14 (23.3) | 46 (76) | 0 (0.0) |
| Discussion | ||||
| 18 | Summarise key results with reference to study objectives | 60 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 19 | Discuss limitations of the study, taking into account sources of potential bias or imprecision. Discuss both direction and magnitude of any potential bias | 53 (88.3) | 7 (11.7) | 0 (0.0) |
| 20a | Give a cautious interpretation of results considering objectives | 60 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 20b | Explain results from similar studies | 60 (100.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| 21 | Discuss the generalisability (external validity) of the study results | 46 (76.7) | 14 (23.3) | 0 (0.0) |
| Other information | ||||
| 22 | Give the source of funding and the role of the funders for the present study | 56 (93.3) | 4 (6.7) | 0 (0.0) |
| 1–22 | Total | 63.74 | 29.70 | 6.56 |
The STROBE statement is the guidelines for reporting observational studies, defined as Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology