Methods and processes of developing the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology - veterinary (STROBE-Vet) statement

BACKGROUND

The reporting of observational studies in veterinary research presents many challenges that often are not adequately addressed in published reporting guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To develop an extension of the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement that addresses unique reporting requirements for observational studies in veterinary medicine related to health, production, welfare, and food safety.

DESIGN

A consensus meeting of experts was organized to develop an extension of the STROBE statement to address observational studies in veterinary medicine with respect to animal health, animal production, animal welfare, and food safety outcomes.

SETTING

Consensus meeting May 11-13, 2014 in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

Seventeen experts from North America, Europe, and Australia attended the meeting. The experts were epidemiologists and biostatisticians, many of whom hold or have held editorial positions with relevant journals.

METHODS

Prior to the meeting, 19 experts completed a survey about whether they felt any of the 22 items of the STROBE statement should be modified and if items should be added to address unique issues related to observational studies in animal species with health, production, welfare, or food safety outcomes. At the meeting, the participants were provided with the survey responses and relevant literature concerning the reporting of veterinary observational studies. During the meeting, each STROBE item was discussed to determine whether or not re-wording was recommended, and whether additions were warranted. Anonymous voting was used to determine whether there was consensus for each item change or addition.

RESULTS

The consensus was that six items needed no modifications or additions. Modifications or additions were made to the STROBE items numbered: 1 (title and abstract), 3 (objectives), 5 (setting), 6 (participants), 7 (variables), 8 (data sources/measurement), 9 (bias), 10 (study size), 12 (statistical methods), 13 (participants), 14 (descriptive data), 15 (outcome data), 16 (main results), 17 (other analyses), 19 (limitations), and 22 (funding).

LIMITATION

Published literature was not always available to support modification to, or inclusion of, an item.

CONCLUSION

The methods and processes used in the development of this statement were similar to those used for other extensions of the STROBE statement. The use of this extension to the STROBE statement should improve the reporting of observational studies in veterinary research related to animal health, production, welfare, or food safety outcomes by recognizing the unique features of observational studies involving food-producing and companion animals, products of animal origin, aquaculture, and wildlife.

Methods and Processes of Developing the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-Veterinary (STROBE-Vet) Statement

Reporting of observational studies in veterinary research presents challenges that often are not addressed in published reporting guidelines. Our objective was to develop an extension of the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement that addresses unique reporting requirements for observational studies in veterinary medicine related to health, production, welfare, and food safety. We conducted a consensus meeting with 17 experts in Mississauga, Canada. Experts completed a premeeting survey about whether items in the STROBE statement should be modified or added to address unique issues related to observational studies in animal species with health, production, welfare, or food safety outcomes. During the meeting, each STROBE item was discussed to determine whether or not rewording was recommended, and whether additions were warranted. Anonymous voting was used to determine consensus. Six items required no modifications or additions. Modifications or additions were made to the STROBE items 1 (title and abstract), 3 (objectives), 5 (setting), 6 (participants), 7 (variables), 8 (data sources and measurement), 9 (bias), 10 (study size), 12 (statistical methods), 13 (participants), 14 (descriptive data), 15 (outcome data), 16 (main results), 17 (other analyses), 19 (limitations), and 22 (funding). The methods and processes used were similar to those used for other extensions of the STROBE statement. The use of this STROBE statement extension should improve reporting of observational studies in veterinary research by recognizing unique features of observational studies involving food-producing and companion animals, products of animal origin, aquaculture, and wildlife.

Explanation and Elaboration Document for the STROBE-Vet Statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-Veterinary Extension

The STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement was first published in 2007 and again in 2014. The purpose of the original STROBE was to provide guidance for authors, reviewers, and editors to improve the comprehensiveness of reporting; however, STROBE has a unique focus on observational studies. Although much of the guidance provided by the original STROBE document is directly applicable, it was deemed useful to map those statements to veterinary concepts, provide veterinary examples, and highlight unique aspects of reporting in veterinary observational studies. Here, we present the examples and explanations for the checklist items included in the STROBE-Vet statement. Thus, this is a companion document to the STROBE-Vet statement methods and process document (JVIM_14575 "Methods and Processes of Developing the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-Veterinary (STROBE-Vet) Statement" undergoing proofing), which describes the checklist and how it was developed.

Methods and Processes of Developing the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology - Veterinary (STROBE-Vet) Statement

Background

Reporting of observational studies in veterinary research presents challenges that often are not addressed in published reporting guidelines.

Objective

To develop an extension of the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement that addresses unique reporting requirements for observational studies in veterinary medicine related to health, production, welfare, and food safety.

Design

Consensus meeting of experts.

Setting

Mississauga, Canada.

Participants

Seventeen experts from North America, Europe, and Australia.

Methods

Experts completed a pre‐meeting survey about whether items in the STROBE statement should be modified or added to address unique issues related to observational studies in animal species with health, production, welfare, or food safety outcomes. During the meeting, each STROBE item was discussed to determine whether or not rewording was recommended and whether additions were warranted. Anonymous voting was used to determine consensus.

Results

Six items required no modifications or additions. Modifications or additions were made to the STROBE items 1 (title and abstract), 3 (objectives), 5 (setting), 6 (participants), 7 (variables), 8 (data sources/measurement), 9 (bias), 10 (study size), 12 (statistical methods), 13 (participants), 14 (descriptive data), 15 (outcome data), 16 (main results), 17 (other analyses), 19 (limitations), and 22 (funding).

Conclusion

The methods and processes used were similar to those used for other extensions of the STROBE statement. The use of this STROBE statement extension should improve reporting of observational studies in veterinary research by recognizing unique features of observational studies involving food‐producing and companion animals, products of animal origin, aquaculture, and wildlife.

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology - nutritional epidemiology (STROBE-nut): An extension of the STROBE statement

Concerns have been raised about the quality of reporting in nutritional epidemiology. Research reporting guidelines such as the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement can improve quality of reporting in observational studies. Herein, we propose recommendations for reporting nutritional epidemiology and dietary assessment research by extending the STROBE statement into Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology - Nutritional Epidemiology (STROBE-nut). Recommendations for the reporting of nutritional epidemiology and dietary assessment research were developed following a systematic and consultative process, co-ordinated by a multidisciplinary group of 21 experts. Consensus on reporting guidelines was reached through a three-round Delphi consultation process with 53 external experts. In total, 24 recommendations for nutritional epidemiology were added to the STROBE checklist. When used appropriately, reporting guidelines for nutritional epidemiology can contribute to improve reporting of observational studies with a focus on diet and health.

[Survival of grafts in the first 100 renal transplants at the Carlos van Buren Hospital]

BACKGROUND

Renal transplant is the best therapeutic alternative for chronic renal failure, although it is not exempt of risks.

AIM

To report the survival of renal transplant recipients and grafts and the main complications at a public hospital in Chile.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a non experimental, open historical cohort study, with reposition of the first 100 transplants in 94 patients, performed at the Carlos van Buren Hospital between 1984 and 1998. Seventy grafts came from cadaveric donors and 30 from live donors. As immunosuppressive therapy, prednisone + azathioprine was used in 48 transplants and the same regimen plus cyclosporine in 52.

RESULTS

Mean age of recipients was 36 +/- 23 years old. Ten years actuarial survival of patients was 80.5% in transplants from cadaveric donors and 86% in transplants from live donors. Ten years graft survival was 57.5% in transplants from cadaveric donors and 42% in transplants from live donors. The period in which the transplant was performed (first or second half of the observation period), type of donor, HLA B-DR compatibility and sensitization (% PRA) had no effect on survival. Twenty five subjects lost their graft, 12 due to acute steroid resistant rejection, 10 due to chronic graft nephropathy and three due to renal artery thrombosis. Fifteen subjects died with a functioning graft, 10 due to infections, two due to an acute myocardial infarction, two due to an acute pancreatitis and one due to a brain tumor.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival of grafts and renal transplant recipients was not influenced by the type of donor, period of transplantation and immune variables. Main causes of recipient death were infections and the main cause of graft failure was acute rejection.

A23187 causes release of inositol phosphates from cultured rat Kupffer cells

The Ca2+ ionophore A23187 is routinely used to illustrate the extracellular Ca2+-dependence of a variety of cellular reactions. We found that A23187-induced hydrolysis of phosphoinositides to various inositol phosphates in rat Kupffer cells was accompanied by their release from the cells. The synthesis and release of inositol phosphates was A23187 concentration-dependent (0.5-10 microM), and was apparent at the lowest concentration tested. A23187-induced release of inositol phosphates increased time-dependently, was apparent at 5 s of stimulation and maximal at 20 min. The effects of A23187 were reversed by EGTA. The integrity of the cells was not affected by A23187 treatment as indicated by their exclusion of trypan blue and the lack of release of lactate dehydrogenase. We propose that such effects should be considered while evaluating the Ca2+-dependence of biological processes based on the actions of A23187.