Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of reporting of indicators of research quality in research on CAM and the mass media*

From: A scoping review of research on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and the mass media: Looking back, moving forward

Author, Year [refID]

Indicators of Research Quality not Reported in Research Article

Adelman, 2003 [25]

â—‹ Excludes discussion of reliability in sampling and measurement

Bubela, 2006 [10]

â—‹ Excludes discussion of reliability in sampling and measurement

Ernst and Schmidt, 2004 [28]

â—‹ Excludes description of sampling procedure

 

â—‹ Excludes discussion of reliability in sampling and measurement

 

â—‹ Potential for bias as authors analyzing coverage of their own press release

Ernst and Weihmayr, 2000 [29]

â—‹ Excludes discussion of reliability in sampling and measurement

 

â—‹ Excludes definition of subjective outcomes

Koper, 2006 [33]

â—‹ Excludes description of sampling procedure

 

â—‹ Excludes discussion of reliability in sampling and measurement

 

â—‹ Excludes definition of subjective outcomes

Milazzo, 2006 [6]

â—‹ Excludes discussion of reliability in sampling and measurement

 

â—‹ Time period sampled cannot show variation in reporting throughout year

 

â—‹ Excludes definition of subjective outcomes

Miles, 1998 [34]

â—‹ Excludes description of approach to data analysis and verification

Reddy, 2000 [7]

â—‹ Excludes description of methodological approach, e.g., sampling, data analysis, data verification

  1. * following a broad assessment of standard quality criteria as adapted from Glasziou et al. [8], Creswell [41] and Morse & Richards [42].