Reporting potential bias: Neurology's evolving policies

The STROBE statement and neuropsychology: lighting the way toward evidence-based practice

Reporting appropriate research detail across clinical disciplines is often inconsistent or incomplete. Insufficient report detail reduces confidence in findings, makes study replication more difficult, and decreases the precision of data available for critical review including meta-analysis. In response to these concerns, cooperative attempts across multiple specialties have developed explicit research reporting standards to guide publication detail. These recommendations have been widely adopted by high impact medical journals, but have not yet been widely embraced by neuropsychology. The STROBE Statement (STrengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology) is particularly relevant to neuropsychology since clinical research is often based on non-funded studies of patient samples. In this paper we describe the STROBE Statement and demonstrate how STROBE criteria, applied to reporting of neuropsychological findings, will maintain neuropsychology's position as a leader in quantifying brain-behavior relationships. We also provide specific recommendations for data reporting and disclosure of perceived conflicts of interest that will further enhance reporting transparency for possible perceived sources of bias. In an era in which evidence-based practice assumes an increasingly prominent role, improved reporting standards will promote better patient care, assist in developing quality practice guidelines, and ensure that neuropsychology remains a vigorous discipline in the clinical neurosciences that consciously aspires to high methodological rigor.

Honorary and ghost authorship

Has not substantially declined, suggesting that standards need tightening up