Introduction
Allergic diseases represent a public health issue 1.
Up to 30% of individuals may be affected by some type of allergic
diseases whose prevalence, as a whole, is on the rise2–5. Scientific evidence from observational studies
is accumulating quickly in the field of allergy epidemiology, as also
indicated by the increasing number of systematic reviews in allergy
epidemiology 6,7. However, the availability of a vast
number of published papers does not necessarily correspond to the timely
translation of such research into public health and prevention
programmes. This is also true in allergy epidemiology, where delivery of
care and healthcare services have not evolved sufficiently despite an
increased prevalence of allergic diseases 8.
Evidence-based prevention has become a topic of great interest in the
field of allergy immunology and its implementation is clearly strategic9.
The quality of reporting of allergy observational studies is crucial for
any kind of subsequent research and utilization, including the
translation into effective and efficient public health and evidence
based prevention programmes 10,11. Peer-reviewed
journals in the field of allergy epidemiology require that papers from
observational studies have a certain quality of reporting. Tools have
been proposed to guide or evaluate the quality of reporting in
observational studies. Those tools are collected by the EQUATOR network12. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational
Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) is one of the most comprehensive tools
in use. STROBE is also widely accepted and recommended by the
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
https://www.strobe-statement.org/index.php?id=strobe-endorsement.
After a three-year research process involving more than 35 scientists,
the STROBE checklist was first published in 2007. It consists of 22
items, four of which are specifically defined by study design
(cross-sectional, cohort and case-control) while the other 18 items
evaluate certain aspects of reporting quality that are shared by all
observational designs 13. The STROBE checklist is also
attractive because it evaluates reporting quality by paper section with
specific items for title and abstract, introduction, methods, results
and discussion. Thus, STROBE appears to be a suitable tool to evaluate
reporting quality in observational research; however, its correct use is
not free from pitfalls 14. STROBE is of qualitative
nature so its quantitative use is challenging. For example, it is not
intuitive to understand if and how, following STROBE assessment, the
reporting from a given study can be considered as poor or satisfactory
from an overall or section-specific viewpoint.
This study was developed and conducted by a Task Force “Adherence to
reporting guidelines in articles published in EAACI Journals” of the
European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI). The aim of
this study was to evaluate the degree to which the 22 STROBE items were
adhered to in research published in the field of allergy and whether
this varied over time and by study design.