Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36042426›Full record

ReviewInternational journal for equity in health2022

Social Accountability Reporting for Research (SAR4Research): checklist to strengthen reporting on studies on social accountability in the literature.

Joan Marie Kraft, Ligia Paina, Victoria Boydell, Shatha Elnakib, Andreas Sihotang, Angela Bailey, Courtney Tolmie

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal for equity in health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Joan Marie Kraft *Office of Population and Reproductive Health, United States Agency for International Development, 500 D St SW, UA-5th Floor, Washington DC, 20547, USA.
Ligia Paina *Department of International Health, Health Systems Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Victoria Boydell *School of Health and Social Care, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, UK. vickyboydell@gmail.com.
Shatha ElnakibDepartment of International Health, Health Systems Program, Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Andreas SihotangHarry S Truman School of Public Affairs, University of Missouri, 101 Middlebush Hall, Columbia, Missouri, 65211, USA.
Angela BaileyAccountability Research Center, American University, 4400 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington DC, 20016, USA.
Courtney TolmieWonderlight Consulting, 8342 Charlise Rd, Richmond, VA, 23235, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAn increasing number of evaluations of social accountability (SA) interventions have been published in the past decade, however, reporting gaps make it difficult to summarize findings. We developed the Social Accountability Reporting for Research (SAR4Research) checklist to support researchers to improve the documentation of SA processes, context, study designs, and outcomes in the peer reviewed literature and to enhance application of findings.

methodsWe used a multi-step process, starting with an umbrella review of reviews on SA to identify reporting gaps. Next, we reviewed existing guidelines for reporting on behavioral interventions to determine whether one could be used in its current or adapted form. We received feedback from practitioners and researchers and tested the checklist through three worked examples using outcome papers from three SA projects.

resultsOur umbrella review of SA studies identified reporting gaps in all areas, including gaps in reporting on the context, intervention components, and study methods. Because no existing guidelines called for details on context and the complex processes in SA interventions, we used CONSORT-SPI as the basis for the SAR4Research checklist, and adapted it using other existing checklists to fill gaps. Feedback from practitioners, researchers and the worked examples suggested the need to eliminate redundancies, add explanations for items, and clarify reporting for quantitative and qualitative study components.

conclusionsResults of SA evaluations in the peer-reviewed literature will be more useful, facilitating learning and application of findings, when study designs, interventions and their context are described fully in one or a set of papers. This checklist will help authors report better in peer-reviewed journal articles. With sufficient information, readers will better understand whether the results can inform accountability strategies in their own contexts. As a field, we will be better able to identify emerging findings and gaps in our understanding of SA.

Indexed as

ChecklistResearch DesignBehavior TherapyHumansResearch PersonnelSocial ResponsibilityevaluationIndonesiaReporting checklistsocial accountabilityUganda

Identifiers

PMID36042426
PMCPMC9425941

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.