Declaration of use and appropriate use of reporting guidelines in high-impact rehabilitation journals is limited: a meta-research study

Objectives The main aims of this metaresearch study conducted among high-impact rehabilitation journals were: 1) to evaluate if the use reporting guidelines (RGs) was declared and 2) categorize as appropriate or inappropriate. Study Design Setting Cross-sectional analysis a random sample 200 studies published in period 2010–2019 five generic with highest 5-year impact factor. Randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, observational studies, diagnostic were included. Prevalence 95% confidence intervals (CIs) estimated for outcomes. Results Among selected 17.5% (95% CI: 12.2–22.8%) using RGs. these 48.6% 32–65.1%) an use. There increasing trend over time authors report RGs (OR: 1.31; 1.13–1.53). Systematic reviews (n = 54) reported more frequently than other designs (35.2%). Conclusion In journals, small minority article approximately half used inappropriately. is urgent need improve field research.