Abstract
-
Objectives: The objective of this study was to develop a reporting
guideline for epidemiological survey reports, referred to as “Guidelines
for Survey Reporting (G-SURE).”
Methods: To develop G-SURE, we adopted a systematic approach,
starting with a detailed review of recent survey reports in Public
Health Weekly Report, Eurosurveillance, and Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report and an analysis of current reporting
standards. After drafting the guidelines, our team conducted an in-depth
internal evaluation to assess their effectiveness and applicability. We then
refined the guidelines based on insights from external experts and potential
users, particularly those with significant experience in survey reporting. The
plan also includes ongoing efforts to widely share the guidelines and update
them periodically, incorporating new findings and user feedback.
Results: G-SURE will provide a structured framework for reporting
outbreak investigations, comprising a detailed checklist and Explanation
& Elaboration documents. These will improve the transparency,
consistency, and quality of public health documentation.
Conclusion: In this protocol article, we introduce G-SURE, a
guideline developed to improve epidemiological survey research. G-SURE addresses
the critical need for uniform reporting standards in epidemiological surveys,
aiming to improve the quality and relevance of research outcomes in this area.
This guideline is also designed to be a key resource for peer reviewers and
editors, aiding them in efficiently assessing the thoroughness and accuracy of
survey reports. By providing consistent reporting criteria, G-SURE seeks to
minimize confusion and irregularities, which are often encountered in the
process of scientific publication.
-
Keywords: Survey report; Public health; Reporting guideline; Study protocol
Introduction
Public Health Weekly Report, which is published by the Korea Disease
Control and Prevention Agency, contains various publication types, including
survey/surveillance reports. This type includes the analysis and reporting of
epidemiological changes in diseases, pathogens, and health issues based on data from
national or international survey/surveillance systems. Survey/surveillance reports
should be 2,000 words or less, with no more than three tables and figures each.
References should be no more than 10. Each report should include an abstract, core
summary, introduction, methods, results, discussion (conclusion), acknowledgments,
and references [
1].
With the exception of surveillance reports, the purpose of the Guidelines for Survey
Reporting (G-SURE), the development of which is discussed herein, is to make it
easier for researchers at the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency to write
survey reports and to ensure that they include all the necessary information.
Because a survey report can be understood as a survey questionnaire study, this
guideline addresses only epidemiological survey reports and clarifies that they are
epidemiological studies. Of course, questionnaire surveys can also be included in
epidemiological surveys. Importantly, these surveys should be limited to the disease
or health condition of interest, not psychological or educational surveys. Survey
reports often cover infectious diseases, but can include all areas of health,
including chronic diseases, environmental diseases, and external cause diseases.
A survey is commonly used to describe observations made to measure and record
something, while surveillance is used to describe the repetition of a standardized
survey to detect changes. In this guideline, surveillance reporting refers to the
ongoing and regular investigation and reporting of diseases, health conditions, and
other epidemiological data in accordance with national legislation or the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) practice guidelines. In other words, survey
reporting is not a one-time event, but rather an ongoing practice that is often
recognized as necessary for public health.
The difference between periodic survey reporting and surveillance reporting is the
legal basis, although periodic survey projects can later be categorized as
surveillance reports on their legal basis. In contrast, outbreak reports are
investigations in situations where there is an urgent need to respond to a sudden
outbreak or epidemic of a disease or health condition.
Survey reporting, surveillance reporting, and outbreak reporting all fall into the
category of investigative reporting, but they are categorized as being conducted for
specific purposes. The recommended reporting guidelines for each of these study
designs are based on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in
Epidemiology (STROBE) statement [
2] and are
simplified to make them easier for the Korea Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention Agency researchers to use.
Epidemiological survey reports play a pivotal role in epidemiological research,
serving as a cornerstone for informed public health decisions and policymaking. They
provide critical insights into the prevalence, distribution, and determinants of
health-related events in specific populations [
3]. By systematically gathering and analyzing data on various health
conditions, survey reports contribute to our understanding of disease patterns, risk
factors, and the effectiveness of health interventions [
4]. Their importance is underscored by their ability to guide
health professionals and policymakers in designing targeted strategies to improve
health outcomes and allocate resources efficiently. In addition, survey reports
promote transparency and accountability in public health, ensuring that
interventions are evidence-based and tailored to meet the unique needs of different
communities.
To the best of our knowledge, however, there is no reporting guideline for survey
reports. Reporting guidelines are defined as checklists, flow diagrams, or
structured texts that serve as a comprehensive roadmap for authors to report
specific types of research [
2]. They are
crucial tools for various groups, including peer reviewers, authors, and scientific
journals. The objective of this study was to develop better reporting guidelines for
epidemiological survey studies; thus, the protocol for the G-SURE, which is
developed through expert consensus, is described herein. Unlike existing guidelines
such as the STROBE statement [
5], which cater
to specific research designs (e.g., cohort studies, case-control studies, or
observational studies), the aim of G-SURE is to increase the clarity, transparency,
and consistency of survey reports. The ultimate goal is to make survey reports more
accessible and valuable to the broader public health community, thereby contributing
to more efficient use of time and resources in epidemiological research.
Methods
This project's methodology is aligned with the Enhancing the Quality and
Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) Network standards [
6]. The methodology incorporates a multidimensional approach,
involving a diverse team of experts to develop robust reporting guidelines.
The research committee, a multidisciplinary consortium, plays a pivotal role in
shaping the reporting guidelines. It comprises preventive medicine experts who
focus on disease prevention strategies, epidemiologists specializing in disease
patterns and outbreak dynamics, methodologists responsible for ensuring
scientific rigor in research design and data analysis, family medicine
practitioners offering insights on practical community health management, public
health professionals aligning the guidelines with broader health policies, and
journal editors ensuring the guidelines meet standards of clarity and
applicability. Their collective expertise, synthesized through workshops and
collaborative sessions, has formed the foundation for developing comprehensive,
scientifically robust, and practical reporting guidelines.
Literature review
Our team conducted an in-depth analysis of manuscripts focusing on survey
reports, published in the last 3 years in internationally acclaimed journals. We
specifically selected Public Health Weekly Report, Morbidity and
Mortality Weekly Report, and Eurosurveillance,
recognizing their substantial contributions to the domain and their commitment
to publishing high-quality survey reports. The chosen manuscripts were
meticulously scrutinized to pinpoint distinctive features, research
methodologies, and key elements pertinent to survey reporting. Following this
comprehensive review, a collaborative meeting with all team members was
convened. The purpose of this meeting was to integrate our findings, engage in
discussions about the variances and parallels in the reporting styles among the
chosen journals, and detect any prevailing gaps in the literature. The insights
gained from these deliberations played a crucial role in shaping the new
reporting guidelines, ensuring they cater to contemporary needs and propel the
standards of survey reporting in health research forward.
Reviewing existing reporting guidelines
This phase focused on closely examining and classifying existing reporting
guidelines, including an in-depth analysis of the STROBE statement. The main aim
was to evaluate these guidelines for their appropriateness and effectiveness in
survey reporting. This involved assessing each guideline’s structure,
essential components, and overall approach to epidemiological survey reporting.
The evaluation particularly concentrated on how these guidelines handle the
specific challenges of survey reports, such as detailing epidemiological
methods, presenting research findings, and discussing the implications for
public health.
Developing new reporting guidelines
The development of the G-SURE guidelines was a methodical process led by our
expert committee. The initial draft was based on insights from a thorough
literature review and an analysis of existing reporting guidelines, ensuring
that G-SURE aligns with current practices and reflects the latest knowledge in
the field. We included Explanation & Elaboration (E&E) documents
for each guideline item, providing clear reasons and context, which improves the
guidelines' practicality.
The committee played a vital role in this phase, meticulously creating each
guideline item. These items are grounded in evidence, drawing from the
collective expertise of the committee, reviewed literature, and existing
guidelines. This collaborative effort ensured coverage of all important elements
of outbreak reporting, with a focus on scientific accuracy and practical
application.
We then repeatedly revised the initial draft of the guidelines and the E&E
documents. This involved applying them to selected literature to evaluate their
effectiveness, and then refining them based on the feedback received. Both
internal team members and external experts, including those experienced in
outbreak reporting, reviewed the drafts. This review process incorporated a
scoring system for a detailed evaluation of each part of the guidelines and the
E&E documents.
Finally, we produced the final version of the guidelines and a comprehensive
manual. The checklist offers a succinct guide for researchers, while the manual
provides in-depth explanations and examples for various outbreak scenarios. This
systematic and evidence-based approach ensured that the final guidelines are
inclusive, up-to-date, and practical for use.
Ongoing updates and revisions
Acknowledging the ever-changing landscape of public health and epidemiological
surveys, we are dedicated to continually updating the G-SURE guidelines. This
regular revision is essential to maintain their relevance and effectiveness
amidst evolving challenges, scientific progress, and new best practices in the
field.
To ensure these updates are timely and effective, the G-SURE guidelines will be
under constant review, aligning them with the latest developments in public
health and epidemiology. Key to this process will be the collection and
integration of feedback from a broad spectrum of users including researchers,
public health experts, epidemiologists, and policymakers. Their input will be
invaluable in identifying areas for improvement and thereby ensuring that the
guidelines remain responsive to user needs.
Results
As of November 2023, the research team has made advancements in developing
comprehensive reporting guidelines for survey reports. Meanwhile, the team has been
working on a detailed checklist and E&E documents. These tools will guide
authors in clearly and consistently reporting survey reports. The finalized versions
of the checklist and E&E documents are expected to be published by December
2024.
Discussion
The field of epidemiological research is rapidly evolving, underscoring the need for
standardized reporting methods. Epidemiological surveys, which are fundamentally
different from surveillance reports, play a critical role in documenting a wide
range of health conditions, including infectious, chronic, and environmental
diseases. Unlike surveillance reports that require ongoing monitoring under specific
health guidelines, epidemiological surveys are typically one-time or periodic
investigations tailored to the specific nature and urgency of health issues. These
surveys, whether conducted irregularly or on a regular basis, have distinct
objectives and thus require unique reporting methodologies. The transition of a
regular survey into a surveillance report is often regulated by the legal framework.
For example, outbreak reports are specifically designed for immediate responses to
sudden disease outbreaks or epidemics.
The introduction of G-SURE, our comprehensive reporting guideline, represents a
significant step forward in addressing the complexities of survey reporting. G-SURE
aims to improve the clarity, transparency, and consistency of these reports.
However, initially navigating the recommended reporting guidelines based on research
design can be challenging and may require a thorough examination of numerous papers
and hands-on experience in both conducting research and writing papers. Since
epidemiological survey reports generally follow a consistent structure, it is
beneficial to consider these guidelines from the outset of the research design
process, including during data collection and analysis, and ultimately in the
writing phase. While G-SURE covers the essential elements of report formatting, it
is not exhaustive. Researchers are encouraged to include additional relevant
information that may not be explicitly mentioned in the guidelines. Conversely, some
sections of G-SURE may be optional, allowing researchers to omit certain elements if
they lack pertinent content; alternatively, they may include these sections with a
notation of "not applicable" when appropriate.
Despite these advancements, the standardization of reporting for diverse types of
surveys remains a complex endeavor. Future updates to G-SURE will tackle these
intricacies. Regular revisions, incorporating user feedback and adapting to changes
in the public health landscape, are essential to ensure the continued relevance and
effectiveness of the guidelines. This adaptive approach is crucial for G-SURE to
keep pace with the dynamic nature of public health emergencies and evolving
epidemiological challenges.
Conclusions
In this protocol article, we introduce the G-SURE guidelines, which were
developed to improve epidemiological research. G-SURE targets the urgent need
for uniform reporting standards in epidemiological surveys, aiming to improve
the quality and relevance of research outcomes in this area. This guideline is
designed to be a key resource for peer reviewers and editors, aiding them in
efficiently assessing the thoroughness and accuracy of survey reports. By
providing consistent reporting criteria, G-SURE seeks to minimize confusion and
irregularities, which are often encountered in the process of scientific
publication.
Authors' contributions
-
Project administration: Kim SY
Conceptualization: Jung W, Kim SY, Ryu S, Ryu SY, Ha M
Methodology & data curation: Jung W, Kim SY, Ryu S, Ryu SY, Ha M, Choi
BY
Funding acquisition: Kim SY, Choi BY
Writing - original draft: Jung W, Kim SY
Writing - review & editing: Jung W, Kim SY, Ryu S, Ryu SY, Ha M, Choi
BY
Conflict of interest
-
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Funding
-
This research was funded through the support of the Policy Research and
Development Service Project (202305210001) from the Korea Disease Control and
Prevention Agency.
Data availability
-
Not applicable.
Acknowledgments
We extend our gratitude to Ms. JiHye Kwon for her invaluable administrative
assistance.
Supplementary materials
-
Not applicable.
References
- 1. Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. Instruction for authors, Public Health Weekly Report (updated April
28th, 2023); Cheongju: Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency; 2023.
- 2. Kim SY. Reporting guidelines. Korean J Fam Med 2009;30(1):62
- 3. Williams R, Wright J. Epidemiological issues in health needs assessment. BMJ 1998;316(7141):1379-1382.
- 4. Tulchinsky TH, Varavikova EA. Measuring, monitoring, and evaluating the health of a
population. In: Tulchinsky TH, Varavikova EA, editors. editors. The new public health; Cambridge: Academic Press; 2014 p. 91147.
- 5. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in
epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational
studies. BMJ 2007;335(7624):806-808.
- 6. The EQUATOR Network. How to develop a reporting guideline [Internet] Oxford (UK), The EQUATOR Network. c2018;[cited 2024 May 24]. Available from https://www.equator-network.org/toolkits/developing-a-reporting-guideline/
