Editorial: Enhancing Transparent Reporting of Pediatric Psychology Intervention Research: Introducing the Role of the Student Editorial Liaison

Complete and transparent reporting of intervention trials is essential for accurately assessing the validity, reliability, and utility of findings (Simera et al., 2010). Unfortunately, inadequate reporting of intervention studies continues to be a pervasive concern across biomedical and psychosocial health research (Altman& Moher, 2014). In particular, systematic reviews highlight that peer-reviewed journal articles frequently lack detailed information regarding eligibility criteria, intervention delivery and service environment, participant flow, measurement of primary and secondary outcomes, sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, sample size calculations, adverse events, and data analytic methods (Azar, Riehm, McKay,& Thombs, 2015;Crocetti, Amin,& Scherer, 2010;de Vries& van Roon, 2010;Grant, Mayo-Wilson, Melendez-Torres,& Montgomery, 2013). In addition, selective reporting of outcomes and misrepresentation of findings are common occurrences in published reports of clinical trials (Boutron, Dutton, Ravaud,& Altman, 2010;Chan, Hr óbjartsson, Haahr, Gøtzsche,& Altman, 2004;Dwan et al., 2008;Dwan et al., 2011). In turn, these shortcomings significantly limit stakeholders ’ ability to assess risk of bias in clinical trials and hinder subsequent replication efforts and meta-analyses, thereby reducing the quality of the broader evidence base and impeding advancements in clinical practice and public health policy (Clyburne-Sherin et ...
Source: Journal of Pediatric Psychology - Category: Pediatrics Source Type: research