Background and objectives: Observational studies play a vital role in nutrition journals, but no studies have assessed the reporting quality of observational studies after the publication of the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE)-nutritional epidemiology (STROBE-nut) statement in 2016. This study assessed the reporting quality of observational studies published in high-impact-factor nutrition journals by using the STROBE-nut statement and explored factors affecting the reporting quality.
Methods and study design: All observational studies published in those journals were retrieved using the PubMed database from inception to May 1, 2019. The reporting quality of the included articles was assessed as per the STROBE-nut statement checklist. Compliance with each item of the statement and the total STROBE-nut score were calculated. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify potential factors associated with reporting quality.
Results: Of the 964 observational studies identified, a random sample of 200 articles was considered for analysis. The median compliance with items was 74.0%. Seven items (12.07%) were reported in <10.0% of articles, with STROBE 10 (3.00%), nut-12.2 (2.50%), and nut-14 (2.00%) having the lowest reporting rates. The mean STROBE-nut score was 40.35, which was suboptimal. STROBE-nut scores were higher for cohort studies (p=0.04) and when statisticians or epidemiologists were involved in the study (p=0.004).
Conclusions: Observational studies published in nutrition journals were found to have suboptimal reporting quality. Nutrition journals should endorse the STROBEnut statement checklist for observational studies to improve reporting quality and provide readers with reliable evidence.