Porovnat metody

	Síť EQUATOR: Standardy pro vykazování výsledků zdravotnického výzkumu	Standardy pro statistické vykazování: transparentní vykazování analýz
Obor	Akademické psaní	Akademické psaní
Rodina	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Rok vzniku	2006	2005
Tvůrce	EQUATOR Network (founded 2006); hosted by University of Oxford	Statistical and methodological literature; emphasized by Cumming (2013), ICMJE, and replication crisis discussions
Typ	Standard	Guideline
Původní zdroj	Moher, D., Altman, D. G., Schulz, K. F., Simera, I., & Wager, E. (2012). Guidelines for reporting health research: A user's manual. British Medical Journal, 345, e5997.	Cumming, G. (2013). The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science, 25(1), 7–29.
Další názvy	EQUATOR, reporting guidelines, PRISMA, CONSORT	reporting statistics, statistical transparency, effect size reporting
Příbuzné	4	4
Shrnutí	EQUATOR (Enhancing QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) is a global network that develops, endorses, and promotes reporting guidelines for health and life sciences research. Founded in 2006 and hosted by the University of Oxford, EQUATOR maintains a library of 500+ guidelines covering study designs (randomized trials, observational studies, systematic reviews, case reports, qualitative research, etc.). Major guidelines include CONSORT (randomized controlled trials), STROBE (observational studies), PRISMA (systematic reviews and meta-analyses), and CARE (case reports). These guidelines specify which items must be reported and how to report them, reducing inconsistency and enabling readers to assess study validity. Many journals now require adherence to relevant EQUATOR guidelines.	Transparent reporting of statistical results—including effect sizes, confidence intervals, p-values, and assumptions—is essential for scientific integrity and reproducibility. Many published studies report p-values in isolation without effect sizes or confidence intervals, making it impossible for readers to assess the magnitude of findings. Statistical reporting standards, emphasized by Cumming (2013), the American Statistical Association, and the ICMJE, require effect sizes, confidence intervals, and discussion of uncertainty. This enables readers to judge whether findings are practically significant (not just statistically significant) and to compare effect sizes across studies in meta-analyses. Poor statistical reporting wastes research and prevents proper synthesis of evidence.