Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 2, 2026

Author Spotlight: Advancing Endoscopic Ossiculoplasty – Techniques, Innovations, and Practical Guidance for Clinical Integration
Published on: January 26, 2024
Reporting guidelines and journal quality in otolaryngology
A H Henderson1, T Upile2, Y Pilavakis2
1Department of ENT, The Great Western Hospital, Swindon, UK. Arthur.henderson@doctors.org.uk.
Objectives:
Journals increasingly use reporting guidelines to standardise research papers, partly to improve quality. Although defining journal quality is difficult, various calculated metrics are used. This study investigates guideline adoption by otolaryngology journals and whether a relationship exists between this and journal quality.
Design, Setting, Participants:
Retrospective MEDLINE database review for English language, Index Medicus, journals of interest to otolaryngologists (October 2013).
Main Outcome Measures:
The resulting journals were examined for the number of guidelines endorsed and then tabulated against surrogate measures of journal quality (Impact factor, Eigenfactor, SCImago, Source-Normalised rank). The primary outcome measure was the number of recognised reporting guidelines endorsed per journal. This was then correlated against journal quality scores. For comparison, a further small sample correlation was performed with 6 randomly selected and 6 high-profile clinical non-otolaryngology journals.
Results:
37 otolaryngology journals were identified. Number of guidelines used and quality scores were not normally distributed. Mean guideline usage was 1.0 for otolaryngology journals, 1.5 for randomly selected, and 5.5 for the high-profile journals. Only 18/37 (49%) otolaryngology journals endorsed any guidelines, compared with 11/12 non-otolaryngology journals. Within otolaryngology, Eigenfactor positively correlated with guideline use (r = 0.4, n = 44, p < 0.01) otherwise no correlation was found between guideline endorsement and journal quality.
Conclusions:
Reporting guideline endorsement within otolaryngology journals is low. Although it might be expected that use of reporting guidelines improved quality, this is not reflected in the derived quality scores in otolaryngology. This may reflect low levels of use/enforcement, that quality indicators are inherently flawed, or that generalised guidelines are not always appropriate or valued by editors.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Reports III: Telephone and Verbal Reports
Here's an overview of each type:
Telephone Orders
Guidelines for Nursing Documentation I
Factual:
The following points emphasize the significance of upholding accurate and unbiased documentation in healthcare.
Introduction to Documentation and Reporting
Nursing documentation records essential information and details regarding a patient's care and treatment in written or electronic form. It is a critical aspect of nursing practice that involves documenting assessments, interventions, outcomes, and other relevant details about a patient's health status.
Documentation maps the patient's health journey by creating a comprehensive...
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
Standards of Care II
Guidelines for Nursing Documentation II
Timely documentation is crucial to ensure continuity of care for patients. Any delays in recording or reporting medical information can result in medical errors and even adverse patient outcomes. From medication administration to diagnostic test results, every detail must be accurately and promptly documented to provide the best possible care for patients.

