PRISMA-S: guidance for reporting literature search methods for systematic reviews published
The PRISMA-S checklist aims to ensure transparent reporting and maximum reproducibility of literature searches performed as part of systematic reviews.
Meeting report: summary of session 1 of the 9th EMWA symposium
Missed the meeting? Read our report to get up to speed!
Is the quality of scientific reporting in preprints up to the peer review standard?
Find out if preprints are up to scratch when it comes to transparent reporting and whether traditional peer review can raise the bar higher.
Acknowledging professional writing support in publications – are we doing enough?
It is standard practice to name professional medical writers in publications, but how should we acknowledge subcontracted or freelance support?
Updated guidelines for reporting systematic reviews: the PRISMA 2020 statement
Get up to speed with the recently published PRISMA 2020 statement, which contains updated guidelines for reporting systematic reviews.
New artificial intelligence-specific extension to the SPIRIT guidelines published
A new SPIRIT extension aims to ensure high-quality reporting of published trial protocols of interventions with an artificial intelligence component.
PRISMA-DTA elaboration paper: making diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews more useful
The BMJ publishes an explanation article to aid interpretation of the PRISMA-DTA reporting guidelines.
SPENT: new guidelines for reporting n-of-1 trial protocols
An extension and elaboration of the SPIRIT checklist specific to n-of-1 trials aims to improve the quality and reporting of protocols for this trial type.
Reporting of many clinical trials ruled illegal
A US court ruling finds reporting of many clinical trials of unapproved drugs in breach of the law. But responses to the ruling are uncertain.
Improving transparency in the reporting of systematic reviews without meta-analysis
Find out why guidance is needed and what’s covered in the new Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines.
Navigating the challenges of conference materials: insights from GPCAP
Jackie Marchington gives her perspective on the Good Practice for Conference Abstracts and Presentations (GPCAP) recommendations.
Can you trust an article’s abstract?
Abstract ‘spin’ can distort a study’s findings and lead to inappropriate conclusions being drawn. But just how prevalent is this problem?
[VIDEO] Professional medical writing support and the quality, ethics and timeliness of clinical trial reporting: a systematic review
Obaro Evuarherhe, Principal Consultant at Oxford PharmaGenesis, discusses professional medical writing support and the quality, ethics and timeliness of clinical trial reporting.
Does professional medical writing support impact the quality, ethics and timeliness of clinical trial reporting?
Findings of a systematic review show working with professional medical writers positively affects measures of quality, ethics and timeliness.
AMWA–EMWA–ISMPP joint position statement on predatory publishing
In an article in Current Medical Research & Opinion, three leading medical publishing organisations provide guidance on dealing with predatory publishers.
GPCAP recommendations fill an important gap
Specific guidelines describing best practice for developing conference abstracts and presentations are now available.