Significance of Utilizing Checklists and Statements for Improvement of the Quality of Studies Concerning Hot Springs: evidence grading and various study designs of epidemiological and clinical studies / 日本温泉気候物理医学会雑誌

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to review several kinds of checklists and statements of studies in human subjects, and to examine reporting methods in order to improve the quality of studies concerning hot springs.<br>For randomized controlled trials (RCTs), “the CONSORT Statement” (Moher et al. <i>JAMA</i> 2001) consisting of 22 terms is the most well known checklist. In addition, different versions and new checklists have been developed depending upon the content of the studies (such as intervention methods) or field of the studies. There is also “the QUOROM Statement” (Moher et al. <i>Lancet</i> 1999) for a systematic review (SR) of RCTs, “the TREND Statement” (Jarlais et al. <i>Am J Public Health</i> 2004) for nonrandomized controlled trials, “the STROBE Statement” (Elm et al. <i>Ann Inter Med</i> 2007) for observational studies, and “the MOOSE Checklist” (Stroup et al. <i>JAMA</i> 2000) as a SR of observational studies. With regard to studies on hot springs, however, terms in the checklists and the statements described above are insufficient or inappropriate because of difficulties in performing such studies in a blinded manner, and the diversity of intervention methods, such as the quellen charakter.<br>Improvement of the quality of reports is important for validation of evidence. In order to improve the quality of assessments and reports of studies on hot springs, it may be necessary to develop a unique checklist based on the above-described statements and checklists.