References
Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A et al (2006) Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust 185(5):263–267. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2006.tb00557
Alvarez F, Meyer N, Gourraud PA, Paul C (2009) CONSORT adoption and quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: a systematic analysis in two dermatology journals. Br J Dermatol 161:1159–1165
Blanco D, Schroter S, Aldcroft A et al (2020) Effect of an editorial intervention to improve the completeness of reporting of randomised trials: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 10:e036799. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-036799
Kim DY, Park HS, Cho S, Yoon HS (2019) The quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in the dermatology literature in an era where the CONSORT statement is a standard. Br J Dermatol 180:1361–1367
Journal Rankings on Dermatology (2020) https://www.scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?category=2708. Accessed 23 June 2020
Your one-stop-shop for writing and publishing high-impact health research (2020) The EQUATOR Network. https://www.equator-network.org/. Accessed 23 July 2020
Funding
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed and reviewed the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
None declared.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gorrepati, P.L., Smith, G.P. Evaluating dermatology journals’ use of reporting guidelines in “Author Guidelines”. Arch Dermatol Res 315, 1421–1423 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00403-022-02427-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00403-022-02427-y