Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Vet Intern Med. 2016 Nov;30(6):1887-1895. doi: 10.1111/jvim.14574. Epub 2016 Nov 7.

Methods and Processes of Developing the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology - Veterinary (STROBE-Vet) Statement.

Author information

1
Centre for Public Health and Zoonoses, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
2
Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, Guelph, ON, Canada.
3
Department of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.
4
Centre for Veterinary Epidemiological Research, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PEI, Canada.
5
Department of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
6
Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
7
National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
8
Section for Animal Welfare and Disease Control, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
9
Department of Production and Population Health, Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.
10
Department of Health Management, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PEI, Canada.
11
Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, College Park, MD.
12
Unit for Genomic Epidemiology, National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark.
13
Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
14
Faculty of Veterinary Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Reporting of observational studies in veterinary research presents challenges that often are not addressed in published reporting guidelines.

OBJECTIVE:

To develop an extension of the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement that addresses unique reporting requirements for observational studies in veterinary medicine related to health, production, welfare, and food safety.

DESIGN:

Consensus meeting of experts.

SETTING:

Mississauga, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS:

Seventeen experts from North America, Europe, and Australia.

METHODS:

Experts completed a pre-meeting survey about whether items in the STROBE statement should be modified or added to address unique issues related to observational studies in animal species with health, production, welfare, or food safety outcomes. During the meeting, each STROBE item was discussed to determine whether or not rewording was recommended and whether additions were warranted. Anonymous voting was used to determine consensus.

RESULTS:

Six items required no modifications or additions. Modifications or additions were made to the STROBE items 1 (title and abstract), 3 (objectives), 5 (setting), 6 (participants), 7 (variables), 8 (data sources/measurement), 9 (bias), 10 (study size), 12 (statistical methods), 13 (participants), 14 (descriptive data), 15 (outcome data), 16 (main results), 17 (other analyses), 19 (limitations), and 22 (funding).

CONCLUSION:

The methods and processes used were similar to those used for other extensions of the STROBE statement. The use of this STROBE statement extension should improve reporting of observational studies in veterinary research by recognizing unique features of observational studies involving food-producing and companion animals, products of animal origin, aquaculture, and wildlife.

KEYWORDS:

Animal Health; Animal Reporting guidelines; Animal welfare; Food Safety; Observational studies; Production

PMID:
27859753
PMCID:
PMC5115188
DOI:
10.1111/jvim.14574
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center