of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), which was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001 and 2010, to provide a checklist and flow diagram intended to improve the reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (Moher et al., 2010a). Other familiar reporting guidelines include
Reporting guidelines are distinct from prescribing the methods used in the conduct of research. Although reporting focuses on describing the methods used in a specific study, it does not necessarily mean that a well-reported study is a high-quality study. However, the rationale is that reporting guidelines, by transparently and thoroughly describing the methods employed and results obtained, can help investigators assess the quality of a study.
THE NEED FOR MULTIPLE REPORTING GUIDELINES IN OMICS
In the 2007 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report Cancer Biomarkers: The Promises and Challenges of Improving Detection and Treatment, the committee noted that different sets of reporting guidelines would need to be developed depending on the technologies involved in a study, whether a single biomarker versus panels or patterns of biomarkers is being investigated, and the intended applications of the study. Table D-1 lists several reporting guidelines relevant to omics-based research. In addition, in June 2011, a group of 20 methodologists, clinicians, and journal editors from around the world convened to develop reporting guidelines for studies to develop and/or validate multivariable prediction models. The intended output of this meeting included the publication of a reporting guideline checklist that describes the guideline development process, as well as a longer explanatory publication that mirrors those produced for other reporting guidelines (Collins, 2011). Box D-1 describes the REMARK guideline as an example of a reporting guideline checklist. REMARK, first published in 2005, was developed to address a number of inadequacies of reporting that are prevalent in tumor marker prognostic studies (McShane et al., 2005).