Impact of the SCARE guideline on the reporting of surgical case reports: A before and after study.

INTRODUCTION: The SCARE guideline was developed in 2016 through an expert Delphi consensus exercise. It aimed to improve the quality of reporting of surgical case reports. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of introducing the SCARE guideline for surgical on reporting of case reports submitted to a single journal. METHODS: A total of 20 case reports published in the International Journal of Surgery Case Reports (IJSCR) and Annals of Medicine and Surgery (AMS) in July and August 2016, prior to the introduction of the SCARE guideline (the pre-SCARE period), were randomly identified and scored against the SCARE criteria. Two independent teams performed the scoring giving a total score out of a theoretical maximum of 34 for each case report, the 'SCARE score' (expressed as a percentage). The scores for the two teams were then compared and consensus was reached to achieve a final sore set. This process was repeated for the January and February 2017 issues of the journal, post implementation of the guideline (the post-SCARE period). SCARE scores were compared between the pre- and post-SCARE periods. RESULTS: The mean pre-SCARE score was 75.0% (standard deviation ± 6.29, Range 62-84), and the mean post-SCARE score was 82.6% (standard deviation ± 8.02, range 66-99), a 10% relative increase in compliance which was statistically significant (P < 0.001). The Cohen's Kappa score between teams A and B was 0.871, implying very substantial agreement. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the SCARE guideline resulted in a 10% improvement in the reporting quality of surgical case reports published in a single journal. Adherence to SCARE reporting guidelines by authors, reviewers and editors should be improved to boost reporting quality. Journals should develop their policies, submission processes and guide for authors to incorporate the guideline.

Impact of the PROCESS guideline on the reporting of surgical case series: A before and after study.

INTRODUCTION: The PROCESS guideline was developed in 2016 through expert Delphi consensus. It aimed to improve the quality of reporting of surgical case series. This study assessed the impact of the introduction of the PROCESS guideline on reporting for surgical case series submitted to three journals. METHODS: 20 case series published in the International Journal of Surgery Case Reports (IJSCR), the International Journal of Surgery (IJS) or the Annals of Medicine and Surgery (AMS) in September to December 2016, prior to the introduction of the PROCESS guideline (the pre-PROCESS period), were randomly identified and scored against the PROCESS criteria. Two authors independently scored each article a total score out of 29, the 'PROCESS score' (expressed as a percentage). Scores for the two researchers were compared and consensus was reached to achieve a final score set. The process was repeated for the January 2017 to April 2017 issues of the three journals, post PROCESS implementation (the post-PROCESS period). RESULTS: The mean PROCESS score was 80% (range 66-90%) for the pre-PROCESS period and 84% (range 72-95%) for the post-PROCESS period, a 4% relative increase [STATS]. The Cohen's Kappa score between researchers was 0.907 implying very substantial agreement. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the PROCESS guideline resulted in a 5% improvement in the reporting quality of surgical case series published in three journals. Further research is needed to identify and successfully navigate existing barriers to greater compliance. Authors, reviewers and editors should adhere to the guidelines to boost reporting quality. Journals should develop their policies and guide for authors to incorporate the guideline and mandate compliance.