Publication Characteristics and Reporting Quality of GBD‐Derived Burden of Disease Studies: A Cross‐Sectional Analysis of Lung Cancer
Min Meng, Min Tian, Jieyu Wang, Jiao Zhou, Zhuoxin Xu, Yaolong Chen, Jinhui Tian, Hui CaiABSTRACT
Aim
Using lung cancer as a model disease, we systematically analyzed the publication characteristics and reporting quality of burden of disease (BoD) studies derived from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Database, to provide evidence for standardizing high‐quality BoD research.
Methods
A cross‐sectional study was conducted. We included GBD‐derived lung cancer BoD studies and evaluated reporting quality using 17 core items of the STROBOD Statement. Univariable and multivariable linear regression models were used to explore factors associated with reporting completeness.
Results
A total of 32 studies showed that the number of publications increased significantly since 2025, with repetitive research topics. Evaluation of the 17 core items in the STROBOD Statement revealed that 88.2% (15/17) of the items had reporting deficiencies. The number of reported core items was 11.19 ± 1.67, and none of the included studies reported all of them. The reporting quality of English studies was significantly higher than that of Chinese studies ( p < 0.01).
Conclusions
GBD‐derived lung cancer BoD studies present severe topic homogeneity and suboptimal reporting quality. Developing tailored reporting guidelines is urgently needed to improve the transparency and reliability of BoD research.