PHWR Public Health Weekly Report

A reporting guideline can be defined as a “checklist, flow diagram, or structured text developed following a well-known methodology for authors to use when reporting the results of a particular type of study design” [1]. The use of a reporting guideline has been shown to improve the quality of the report [2,3], and peer review using a reporting guideline has also been shown to improve the quality of the review [4].

Since the publication of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) [5], a set of reporting guidelines for randomized comparative trials, reporting guidelines have been actively developed. The current number of reporting guidelines available for use in medicine exceeds 500. Most of the reporting guidelines can be accessed through the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) network (http://www.equator-network.org).

The primary users of reporting guidelines include researchers, who can use them when writing manuscripts and protocols. With a plethora of reporting guidelines developed, it is imperative to select the most suitable for the manuscript under review. However, not all study designs have reporting guidelines available.

The Public Health Weekly Report (PHWR), the official journal of the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA), is open to various types of manuscript submissions, with the primary categories of publication including outbreak reports, survey reports, surveillance reports, policy reports, and recommendation reports. As most of these studies are of a patient population as a research design, standardized manuscript writing guidelines are absent. This study aims to improve the professionalism of the manuscript content by developing a manuscript writing guide that considers the characteristics of manuscripts for PHWR.

The development of the reporting guidelines for the primary types of manuscripts published in PHWR, including outbreak reports, survey reports, surveillance reports, policy reports, and recommendation reports, involved the following steps: 1) organization of a committee, 2) literature review, 3) review of existing reporting guidelines, 4) development of a draft, and 5) external review.

1. Organization of a Committee

A committee of public health experts, methodology experts, and journal editors was convened to develop the reporting guidelines. The committee engaged in deliberations regarding the methodology for developing the reporting guidelines, the existing body of literature on the subject, and the intended application of the guidelines. The development process was based on the standardized methodology proposed by the EQUATOR network [6].

2. Literature Review

Outbreak reports, survey reports, surveillance reports, policy reports, and recommendation reports retrieved from PHWR (https://www.phwr.org/journal/archives.html), Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR, https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/index.html), and EuroSurveillance (https://www.eurosurveillance.org/) were reviewed for organization, content, and type of report.

3. Review of Existing Reporting Guidelines

Existing reporting guidelines were selected as references to develop reporting guidelines. The details are as follows:

1) ORION (Outbreak Reports and Intervention studies Of Nosocomial infection) statement

It is a reporting guideline for outbreak reports of hospital-acquired infections and intervention studies. It was selected to review the items reported in outbreak reports [7].

2) RECORD (REportingof studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected health Data) statement

It is a reporting guideline used to provide a wide range of resources for research (e.g., disease registries), clinical management (e.g., primary care databases), health systems planning (e.g., healthcare data), clinical practice documentation (e.g., electronic health record data repositories), and epidemiologic surveillance (e.g., cancer registries). It was selected to review items reported in survey reports and surveillance reports [8].

3) Reporting guidelines for case series

Examples include Preferred Reporting Of CasESeries in Surgery (PROCESS) [9] for surgery and the Reporting Guidelines for Plastic Surgery [10]. They were selected for the review case series which are expected to be the most common study design in the literature published in PHWR.

4) STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement

It is a representative guideline for reporting observational studies and serves as the standard for reporting such studies. It was selected to review the overall structure and components of observational studies [11].

5) TREND (Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Nonrandomized Designs)

It is a reporting guideline for non-randomized clinical trials. It was selected to review non-randomized studies [12].

6) CONSISE (Consortium for the Standardization of Influenza Seroepidemiology) statement

It is a reporting guideline for seroepidemiologic studies of influenza. It was selected to review seroepidemiological content that can be included in outbreak reports or surveillance reports [13].

7) STROME-ID (Strengthening the reporting of molecular epidemiology for infectious diseases) statement

It is a reporting guideline for studies on the molecular epidemiology of infectious diseases. It was selected to review the molecular epidemiological content that may be included in outbreak reports or surveillance reports [14].

8) Reporting guidelines for clinical practice guidelines

Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) [15] and Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE) [16] are representative reporting guidelines for clinical practice guidelines. It was selected to review the overall structure and components of the recommendation reports.

4. Determination of the Basic Format of Reporting Guidelines

The basic format of the report was divided into the following sections: title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, conclusions, and other information. A summary (separate from the abstract) was used to describe the significance of the study. The introduction is expected to provide background, need, and purpose. The Methods section is required to describe the study design, subjects, measures, sources, methods of analysis, statistical methods, and missing data. The results section is intended to present participant characteristics and primary outcomes (descriptive and analytical results), while the discussion section is intended to include a summary of results, interpretation, limitations, conclusions, and implications. Other information includes ethical aspects, funding sources, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest, authorship, references, data sharing, and appendices.

5. Development of a Draft

A draft reporting guideline was developed using a basic format to organize the reporting items but reflecting the characteristics of individual types of manuscript. The reporting guideline for outbreak reports was named the Guideline for Community Outbreak Investigation Report (G-CORE). The reporting guideline for surveillance reports was named the Guideline for Survey Report (G-SURE). The reporting guideline for survey reports was named the Guideline for Surveillance Report (G-SIRE). The reporting guideline for Policy Reports was named the Guideline for Standardized Criteria of Policy Reporting (G-SCOPE), and the reporting guideline for recommendation reports was named the Guidelines for Recommendation Reporting (G-RECO). A commentary on individual reporting guidelines was developed by providing explanations and examples for each item.

6. External Review

For each reporting guideline, a panel of two to five experts in the relevant field was convened for an external review. The feedback received was then reviewed and any necessary modifications were made.

7. Protocol Publication

Four of the five reporting guidelines’ protocols [17,,-20] were published, excluding G-SOPE .

A total of five reporting guidelines (G-CORE, G-SURE, G-SIRE, G-SCOPE, and G-RECO) were developed, as well as a commentary for them. The overall contents of the five reporting guidelines are as follows.

1. Guidelines for Community Outbreak Investigation REporting

This instrument facilitates the systematic documentation of the entire process of an outbreak or epidemic investigation, encompassing the following domains: 1) the generation of awareness and the identification of triggers for the outbreak or epidemic; 2) the investigative content and methodologies employed; 3) the investigative outcomes; 4) the implementation of quarantine measures, their efficacy, and their consequences; and 5) the conclusion of the investigation (Table 1).

Table 1 G-CORE (Guidelines for Community Outbreak Investigation REporting) checklist

Reporting Item	Description
Title, abstract and summary
1. Title	1-1.. Include the term ‘outbreak investigation report’ in the title of the report (can be presented after collon (:) as subheading).. 1-2.. Describe type of diseases, time frame (year), geographic region (country, region), and if necessary, characteristics of population within which the study took place in the title.. 1-3.. If there are major findings regarding the source of infection and infection pathway, include it in the title of the report..
2. Abstract	Provide a structured abstract, including Objectives, Methods, Results, and Conclusions.. 2-1.. Objectives: Provide general information on target health problems, the reason and purpose of implementing the outbreak investigation.. 2-2.. Methods: Provide the time and place of the investigation being implemented, target participants, case definition and data collection method, study design, and data analysis method.. 2-3.. Results: Describe the characteristics of the cases and their health problems, temporal and spatial distribution, source of infection and transmission route, factors related to epidemic and spread patterns, public health measures and their effects.. 2-4.. Conclusions: Summarize the main findings and suggest public health implications..
3. Summary	Provide the summary of what is known previously, what new information is presented, and what are the implications.. 3-1.. What is already known about this topic: Describe current nature and onset of existing health problems.. 3-2.. What new information is presented? Describe the new results revealed by the investigation.. 3-3.. What are the implications for public health practice? Describe the public health implications..
Introduction
4. Reasons for carrying out investigation and its characteristics	Describe reasons and importance of carrying out investigation, including the time the index case(s) has been recognized, and general information regarding the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of the target health problems.
5. Objectives	State the goal and the detailed objectives of investigation, including prespecified hypothesis.
Methods
6. Living environment information	Describe the characteristics of the community or population as the living environment in which interact with the target case(s).
7. Case definition and case detection method	Describe the case definition of the disease or investigation method to detect the case.
8. Identification of pathogen	Describe the specimen acquisition system, testing method and the institution performing the test to identify pathogens.
9. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics	Describe the methods for identifying clinical characteristics and calculating epidemiological indicators.
10. Transmission and spreading process	10-1.. Describe the method for identifying the transmission route and the spreading process of disease of syndrome in the community or population.. 10-2.. Describe the methods to identify direct or indirect risk factors involved in the outbreak..
11. Public heath measures	Describe the process of determining and reflecting public health measures.
12. Study design and data analysis	Describe the study design, the statistical methods and the statistical software used in the study.
Results
13. Descriptive epidemiologic charactersitics	Describe the epidemiological characteristics of outbreak by time, place and person, and provide the evidence for judging epidemic.
14. Pathogenic agent	Describe the results of identifying the causative pathogen by microbiology, immunology, or molecular biology methods using the human and environmental specimens.
15. Clinical and epidemiological characteristics	Provide the clinical characteristics and calculated indicators of morbidity, mortality and medical utilization, and host-parasite interaction.
16. Transmission route, spreading process	Describe the transmission and spreading process and factor analysis result together with association indicator.
17. Public health measures and their impact	17-1.. Describe the public health measures implemented to control outbreak based on the evidence.. 17-2.. Describe the results of implementing public health measures and the results of evaluating the impact and/or effectiveness of the measures..
Discussion
18. Summary of findings	Summarize key findings in terms of the objectives of investigation.
19. Characteristics of the outbreak	Describe the unique features of the outbreak compared to similar domestic and foreign outbreaks, and the previous studies.
20. Interpretation	Interpret and discuss the results of investigation.
21. Limitations	Describe the limitations and barriers of the investigation.
22. Conclusions	Present conclusions in regards to the study objectives, public health implications, and (if necessary) suggestions for future research.
Other information
23. Ethics statement	Provide ethical statement. Report information regarding IRB review and informed consent. If the study is exempted from IRB review, include the relevant sentence.
24. Funding	Describe information about the funding source (funding agency, grant number, role of the agency). If there is no funding, state that there is none.
25. Acknowledgements	Disclose the contributions of people or organizations that contributed to the research but are not listed as authors.
26. Conflict of interest	Describe any conflicts of interest, if any.
27. Author contribution	Describe each author’s contribution to the manuscript.
28. References	Provide references according to the structured format.
29. Data sharing	(If necessary) Describe how the data used in the study can be accessed.
30. Supplement	(If necessary) Although not presented in the main text, analysis results that may be helpful in interpreting the results are presented.

2. Guidelines for SUrvey REporting

G-SURE is a reporting guideline used when reporting the results of various survey studies (Table 2). Among the various content of the survey reports, it is mainly used for epidemiological content, as well as for surveys on the corresponding diseases or health conditions, rather than for psychological or educational surveys. G-SURE covers all domains of health conditions, including infectious diseases, chronic diseases, environmental diseases, and exogenous diseases. G-SURE is not intended to be used for surveillance reports. Survey reports, which report observations to measure and record something, are distinguished from surveillance reports, which report and investigate standardized surveys repeatedly to detect changes.

Table 2 G-SURE (Guidelines for SUrvey REporting) checklist

Topic, Domain	No	Description
Title, Abstract and Summary
Title	1	1-1.. Include the term ‘survey report’ in the title of the report (can be presented after colon (:) as subheading)..
		1-2.. Describe type of diseases, time frame (year), geographic region (country, region), and if necessary, characteristics of population within which the study took place in the title..
Abstract	2	Provide a structured abstract, including Objectives, Methods, Results and Conclusions.
		2-1.. Objectives: Provide brief background and purpose of the study.. 2-2.. Methods: Present the data source, definition and size of the population, variables, and statistical analysis method used in the study.. 2-3.. Results: Present the results of standard indicators and related factors, in the case of association analysis.. 2-4.. Conclusions: Summarize the study results and suggest public health implications..
Summary	3	Provide the summary of what is known previously, what new information is presented, and what are implications.. a.. What is known previously: Describe previous survey information relevant to the survey being covered in the study.. b.. What new information is presented: Summarize the survey results and suggest the differences from the previous surveys.. c.. What are implications: Describe the implications from the public health perspectives..
Introduction
Backgrounds	4	Describe the scientific background, current status and importance of the survey.
Objectives	5	Describe the purpose and specific goals of the report.
Methods
Study design	6	Describe the study design such as investigator, duration and location of the survey, target facilities and population size.
Participants	7	7-1.. Describe whether probability sampling was used to select participants, response rate and size of the participants, and the reason why some of the selected participants did not participate in the survey.. 7-2.. (If necessary) Provide a flowchart of study selection process – target population size, eligible study participants, and actual study participants..
Variables	8	Provide the characteristics of target population, outcome variable, and potential confounders, if necessary
Data sources and analysis methods	9	The sources and analysis methods should be clarified if an existing database is used. Describe the components and contents of the survey tool. If it is a questionnaire survey, describe the measurement tool’s reliability, validity, and pretesting contents.
Statistical methods	10	Describe all statistical analysis methods conducted in the study. If a statistical program is used, mention the program details.
Missing data	11	Describe how missing data was handled.
Results
Participants’ characteristics	12	Compare the characteristics of the sample and the survey population. Describe demographic characteristics of the participants (if various characteristics are included, provide a table). (If necessary) Provide a flowchart of study participants.
Main results	13	Describe statistical analysis results such as prevalence, incidence, mortality, positive rate, odds ratio, relative ratio, mean difference, etc.
Discussion
Summary of findings	14	Summarize key findings with reference to study objectives.
Interpretation	15	Present overall interpretation of study results in light of study objectives, limitations, other relevant studies and evidences.
Limitations	16	(If necessary) Provide limitations of the study regarding participants, measurement, analysis tools, etc.
Conclusions and implications	17	Present conclusions in regards to the study objectives, public health implications, and (if necessary) suggestions for future research.
Other information
Ethics statement	18	Provide ethical statement. Report whether the study approved IRB review and obtained informed consent. If the study is exempted from IRB review, describe the relevant matter.
Funding	19	Describe information about the funding source (funding agency, grant number, role of the agency). If there is no funding, state that there is none.
Acknowledgments	20	Describe the individuals who contributed to the research but are not included as authors.
Conflict of interest	21	Describe any conflicts of interest, if any.
Authors’ contribution	22	Describe each author’s contribution to the manuscript.
References	23	Provide references according to the structured format.
Data availability	24	(If necessary) Describe how the data used in the study can be accessed.
Supplementary materials	25	(If necessary) Describe the content of the supplements. If there is no supplement, state that there is none or omit this subheading.

3. Guideline for SurveIllance REport

A surveillance system systematically collects, analyzes, and uses epidemiological information to plan, implement, and evaluate disease management. Surveillance reports are documents that analyze and report epidemiological trends in diseases, pathogens, health issues, etc. These reports are based on data from national or international investigation and surveillance systems. Surveillance reports are reported based on the following: 1) disease reporting data; 2) population vital statistics data; 3) other health survey data and risk factor information; 4) information on exposure to environmental factors; 5) information on existing health programs; 6) data collected by other institutions or information useful for public health; and 7) information on the healthcare system, as well as its impact on the health level of the community (Table 3).

Table 3 G-SIRE (Guideline for SurveIllance REport) checklist

	No	Items
Title, Abstract and Summary
Title	1	1-1.. Include the term ‘surveillance report’ in the title of the report (can be presented after collon (:) as subheading).. 1-2.. Describe type of diseases, time frame (year), geographic region (country, region), and if necessary, characteristics of population within which the study took place in the title..
Abstract	2	Provide a structured abstract, including Objectives, Methods, Results and Conclusions.. a.. Objectives: Provide brief background and purpose of the study.. b.. Methods: Present the data source, definition and size of the population, variables, and statistical analysis method used in the study.. c.. Results: Present the results of standard indicators and related factors, in the case of association analysis.. d.. Conclusions: Summarize the study results and suggest public health implications..
Summary	3	Provide the summary of what is known previously, what new information is presented, and what are implications.. a.. What is known previously: Describe the characteristics and results of operating surveillance system.. b.. What new information is presented: Summarize the results of surveillance reporting, and suggest the differences from the previous results.. c.. What are implications: Describe the implications from the public health perspectives..
Introduction
Background rationale	4	Explain the scientific background and rationale for the surveillance being implemented. (If applicable) Include a brief description of the purpose, operation methods and outputs regarding the surveillance system.
Objectives	5	State specific objectives of the surveillance, including any prespecified hypothesis.
Methods
Study design	6	Describe the study design (cross-sectional study, case-control study, cohort study, etc.).
Data sources	7	Describe the data source of the surveillance system, the data collection period, and the method of selecting subjects (cases) for the specific purpose. (if necessary) Describe how to link with other data sources when the surveillance system data is linked with other data.
Participants	8	8-1.. Provide the definition of study subjects, eligible criteria (or exclusion criteria), and final size of subjects based on eligible criteria.. 8-2.. (If necessary) Provide a flowchart of study selection process – study population, eligible study subjects and actual study subjects..
Data collection/Measurement	9	Describe the data collection method (reporting, questionnaire: PAPI/CAPI, health examination, etc.).
Quality of data	10	10-1.. Describe data quality assessment method regarding surveillance system such as completeness, accuracy of reporting/notification, etc.. 10-2.. Explain the techniques and methods used to manage missing data..
Variables	11	Clearly define variables used or collected in the study such as dependent variables, independent variables (exposure) and confounders. Describe definition and classification of each variable.
Statistical methods	12	Describe the statistical programs used to analyze the results, data analysis process (weighting, missing data, etc.), and result presentation and analysis method (descriptive statistics, univariate analysis, multivariate analysis).
Results
Participants	13	Report the characteristics and socio-demographic distribution of study participants.
Descriptive statistics	14	Provide descriptive information on outcomes, exposures (predictors), potential confounders and effect modifiers.
Analytic statistics	15	15-1.. Present the univariate analysis result regarding dependent variables: Report the number of subjects and indices (e.g., %, incidence, mortality, etc.), including significance result. 15-2.. (If applicable) Present the multivariate analysis result: Report odds ratios or relative risks and 95% confidence intervals if the dependent variable is categorical, or relevance indicators (regression coefficients and significance test results) if it is continuous. 15-3.. (If necessary) Report the result of other analysis conducted such as subgroup analysis, interaction analysis, etc. (Possible to be presented as supplements, depending on the context of the content).
Discussion
Summary of findings	16	Summarize key findings with reference to study objectives.
Interpretation	17	Present overall interpretation of study results based on other relevant studies and evidences.
Limits	18	Present limitations of the study, taking into account sources of potential bias, limitations in study design, incompleteness of surveillance data collection and interpretation of results.
Conclusions	19	Present conclusions in regards to the study objectives, public health implications, and (if necessary) suggestions for future research.
Other information
Ethical statement	20	Provide ethical statement. Report information regarding IRB review and informed consent. If the study is exempted from IRB review, include the relevant sentence.
Funding	21	Describe information about the funding source (funding agency, grant number, role of the agency). If there is no funding, state that there is none.
Acknowledgements	22	Disclose the contributions of people or organizations that contributed to the research but are not listed as authors.
Conflict of interest	23	Describe any conflicts of interest, if any.
Author contribution	24	Describe each author’s contribution to the manuscript.
References	25	Provide references according to the structured format.
Data availability	26	(If necessary) Describe how the data used in the study can be accessed.
Supplements	27	(If necessary) Although not presented in the main text, analysis results that may be helpful in interpreting the results are presented.

4. Guideline for Standardized Criteria Of Policy rEporting

Policy reports are manuscripts that address topics, such as healthcare policies, encompassing formulation (development), implementation (execution), outcomes, and assessment, as well as recommendations for policies related to legislation and frameworks, demand and supply, and related domains. These notes focus on the operations of healthcare institutions or healthcare providers and the obligations of state and local governments to protect and improve the health of the people. The types of policy reports for which this guideline is intended are as follows (Table 4): 1) report of political case report/review; 2) report of policy development and planning; 3) report of enactment and amendment of laws and regulations); and 4) report of policy performance and/or effectiveness evaluation.

Table 4 G-SCOPE (Guideline for Standardized Criteria Of Policy rEporting) checklist

Section/topic	No	Item
Title, Abstract and Summary
Title	1	1-1.. Include the term ‘policy report’ in the title of the report (can be presented after colon (:) as subheading).. 1-2.. Provide the policy name.. 1-3.. Provide when, where, and (if needed) the policy provider (enforcer) and consumer (target)..
Abstract	2	Provide a structured abstract, including Objectives, Methods, Results and Conclusions.. 2-1.. Objectives: Briefly describe the policy and purpose of the report.. 2-2.. Methods: Provide the report type (① case and trend report, ② policy development, measures, and plans, ③ enactment and revision of laws and regulations, and ④ evaluation of results and effects of policy implementation), research design, or methods used for research, development, and evaluation.. 2-3.. Results: Present the key findings from the policy research/development/evaluation.. 2-4.. Conclusions: Summarize the results and suggest the public health policy implications..
Summary	3	Provide the summary of what is known previously, what new information is presented, and what are implications.. 3-1.. What is known previously? Describe the current status and problems with the existing policy and the purpose of the report.. 3-2.. What new information is presented? Describe the key findings (policy objectives, policy alternatives, or recommendations). Describe how it differs from existing policy (if needed).. 3-3.. What are implications? Describe the public health policy implications (technical, health, socioeconomic expectations, etc.)..
Introduction
Background	4	Describe the rationale of the policy (health issue to be addressed, problems and current status, etc.).
Purpose	5	Describe the purpose of the policy report.
Methods
Policy stakeholders and environment	6	6-1.. Describe the primary population relevant to the policy service.. -. Describe the policymakers (developers), policy providers (enforcers), consumers (targets, beneficiaries), or potential victims (opponents).. (If needed) Describe stakeholders’ interest and understanding.. 6-2.. Describe the environment in which the policy is enforced (location, time, duration, etc.)..
Context of the policy	7	(If necessary) Describe background, role and position of the policy in terms of social, economic, political, and health care contexts, as well as the policy development or improvement needs.. -. The needs can be diverse, such as ①changes in the distribution/pattern of relevant diseases, ②legal requirements, ③needs of relevant ministries and sectors, and ④changes in relevant policies and guidelines, and should be clearly described..
Types of reporting and methods	8	8-1.. Describe the type of policy reporting (①case and trend report, ②policy development, measures, and plans, ③enactment and revision of laws and regulations, and ④evaluation of results and effects of policy implementation) and the methods used (situation analysis, literature review, etc.).. 8-2.. (If needed) For Report Types ① and ④, describe the study design.. -. Qualitative research (literature review, focused group interview, interview, etc.), quantitative research (literature review, observational study; cross-sectional study, case-control study, cohort study, etc., experimental studies; randomized trials, quasi-experimental studies, etc.), etc.. 8-3.. (If needed) For Reporting Types ②, ③, and ④, describe, to the extent possible, ways to set policy goals, policy means, and decision-making systems.. -. Include a description of the decision-making system or policy formulation process for the policy, including how stakeholders were consulted..
Results (apply based on the type of report)
Case · trend study results (Report type ①)	9	Present the literature review or situation analysis results.
Results of development, measures, plans, and enactment/revision of laws and regulations(Report type②, ③)	10	Describe the content of the policy, the action plan, and the enactment or revision of laws and regulations.. -. Compare domestic and foreign policies and highlight differences and improvements by timeline, if possible..
Implementation · effectiveness assessment results (Report type ④)	11	11-1.. (If needed) Present the results of the descriptive analysis of the metrics under evaluation.. -. (If needed) present the results of the descriptive analysis of the third variables considered.. 11-2.. Present the final results on policy implementation and effectiveness..
Results of stakeholder participation in decision-making (All reporting types)	12	(If needed) Present the results of stakeholder engagement around the policy.
Expected effects of the policy (All reporting types)	13	13-1.. Describe positive impacts of the policy in all aspects (social, economic, environmental, health care, psychological, personal, etc.).. 13-2.. Describe adverse impacts, unintended effects, etc. that the policy may or has caused in all aspects (social, economic, environmental, healthcare, psychological, personal, etc.)..
Discussion (Conclusions)
Summary of findings	14	Summarize key findings in light of the purpose of policy report and the type of report.
Limitations and conclusions	15	Describe strengths and limitations, comparisons of existing similar and related policies, and conclusions and implications in light of the purpose of the policy report and the type of report.
Suggestions (Report type ①, ④)	16	Describe suggestions to improve the existing policy or implement a new policy.
Other information
Ethics statement	17	Provide ethical statement. Report whether the study approved IRB review and obtained informed consent. If the study is exempted from IRB review, describe the relevant matter.
Funding	18	Describe information about the funding source (funding agency, grant number, role of the agency). If there is no funding, state that there is none.
Acknowledgments	19	Describe the individuals who contributed to the research but are not included as authors.
Conflict of interest	20	Describe any conflicts of interest, if any.
Authors’ contribution	21	Describe each author’s contribution to the manuscript.
References	22	Provide references according to the structured format.
Data availability	23	(If necessary) Describe how the data used in the study can be accessed.
Supplementary materials	24	(If necessary) Describe the content of the supplements. If there is no supplement, state that there is none or omit this subheading.

5. Guidelines for RECOmmendation reporting

Clinical practice guidelines are defined as “recommendations systematically developed to assist doctors and patients in making decisions in specific clinical situations.” The KDCA is involved in the development of several clinical practice guidelines. These guidelines encompass not only the prevention of specific diseases, including screening and vaccination, but also the clinical management of select diseases, i.e., sexually transmitted diseases, infectious diseases. such as tuberculosis. G-RECO (Table 5) is the reporting guideline required to prepare such recommendation reports.

Table 5 G-RECO (Guidelines for RECOmmendation reporting) checklist

Section/topic	No	Item
Title, Abstract and Summary
Title	1	1-1.. Include the term ‘recommendation report’ in the title (can be presented after colon (:) as subheading).. 1-2.. Provide the disease name (health problems), recommend year (or version), and major areas (diagnosis, vaccination, treatment, management, etc.).
Abstract	2	Provide a structured abstract, including Objectives, Methods, Results and Conclusions.. 2-1.. Objectives: Briefly describe the health problems and target population addressed in the recommendation.. 2-2.. Methods: Describe methods of developing the recommendation.. 2-3.. Results: Present the main recommendation and its evidence.. 2-4.. Conclusions: Summarize the results and suggest the public health policy implications..
Summary	3	Provide the summary of what is known previously, what new information is presented, and what are implications.. 3-1.. What is known previously? Describe the contents and problems of the previous recommendation, and the purpose of developing recommendation.. 3-2.. What new information is presented? Describe how it differs from the previous recommendation.. 3-3.. What are implications? Describe the public health policy implications (technical, health, socioeconomic expectations, etc.)..
Background
Description of health issues	4	Describe the epidemiological information (prevalence/incidence, morbidity, mortality, etc.), burden (cost), sociocultural issues, health care system, and environmental issues regarding the target health problems.
Target population	5	Describe the population (or target health problem) of the recommendations.
Target users and settings	6	6-1.. Describe the intended users of the recommendation (primary care physicians, specialists, policymakers, etc.).. 6-2.. Describe the setting of the recommendation (primary care, public health center, inpatient, community, etc.)..
Recommendation Development Group	7	Describe the names, affiliations, positions, and roles of all individuals who participated in the development of clinical guidelines, which is the basis of the recommendation.
Evidence
key questions	8	If recommendations have been developed based on key questions, describe key questions in the form of PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome). If other methods were used, follow appropriate format.
Health outcomes	9	Describe how health outcomes that are being considered in the recommendation have been selected and classified.
Evidence evaluation	10	10-1.. Specify whether a new systematic review was conducted, an existing systematic review was used or other recommendation was adapted to develop recommendations.. 10-2.. Specify how the literature review was conducted (search method, inclusion/exclusion criteria, risk of bias assessment, data synthesis method [meta-analysis, qualitative synthesis], etc.)..
Level of evidence	11	11-1.. Present the method used to evaluate the level of evidence.. 11-2.. Present the level of evidence grade and its meaning..
Recommendation
Recommendation grades	12	12-1.. Provide the method used to determine the recommendation grades.. 12-2.. Present the recommendation grades..
Elements considered in fomulating recommendations	13	13-1.. Describe in detail the benefits and risks of applying the recommendations that were considered in deriving the recommendations.. 13-2.. Describe whether the values and preferences of the target population were considered in deriving recommendations. Describe (if necessary) the approach or method by which values and preferences were identified.. 13-3.. Describe whether costs and resources were considered in deriving the recommendation. (If necessary) present a summary of the methods (cost-effectiveness analysis, etc.) by which cost and resource implications were identified and what are the results.. 13-4.. Describe other factors considered in deriving the recommendation (e.g. equity, feasibility, acceptability, etc.), if any..
Evidence derivation methodology	14	Describe the method used to derive the recommendation (e.g. voting, Delphi method, consensus conference, etc.).
Recommendation statement	15	15-1.. Present recommendation statement in an unambiguous and actionable manner.. 15-2.. If factors affecting recommendations, such as weighing benefits and harms, are different depending on the subgroup, the recommendations are presented separately according to the subgroup..
Review and Update
external review	16	Describe whether external review was conducted on the draft recommendation. If an external review was conducted, describe the method, how the review comment was received, and how it was handled.
Update	17	Describe whether the recommendation is scheduled to be updated in the future, what process will be followed, and the criteria to determine whether or not to update the recommendation.
Other information
Ethics statement	18	Provide ethical statement. Report whether the study approved IRB review and obtained informed consent. If the study is exempted from IRB review, describe the relevant matter.
Funding	19	Describe information about the funding source (funding agency, grant number, role of the agency). If there is no funding, state that there is none.
Acknowledgments	20	Describe the individuals who contributed to the research but are not included as authors.
Conflict of interest	21	Describe any conflicts of interest, if any.
Authors’ contribution	22	Describe each author’s contribution to the manuscript.
References	23	Provide references according to the structured format.
Data availability	24	(If necessary) Describe how the data used in the study can be accessed.
Supplementary materials	25	(If necessary) Describe the content of the supplements. If there is no supplement, state that there is none or omit this subheading.

A reporting guideline is defined as “a checklist or flowchart that an author can use when reporting the results of a specific type of study design” [1]. A review of the main types of manuscripts published in PHWR revealed the presence of similar reporting guidelines; however, no matching guidelines were identified. Therefore, a set of reporting guidelines was formulated for the primary categories of manuscripts published in PHWR, namely outbreak reports, survey reports, surveillance reports, policy reports, and recommendation reports (G-CORE, G-SURE, G-SIRE, G-SCOPE, and G-RECO), using the standard reporting guideline development methodology [6]. Furthermore, a commentary was prepared to accompany the reporting guidelines.

Despite the existence of previous infection-related reporting guidelines, including the ORION [7] and CONSISE statement [13], G-CORE is notable as the first reporting guideline specifically designed for community outbreaks. A comparison of the G-CORE reporting items with other outbreak reports reveals notable distinctions, particularly regarding the reasons for the investigation, information on the living environment, transmission and spread process, and quarantine measures.

A comparison of survey reports and surveillance reports reveals some similarities and, in certain instances, existing reports present them as a single reporting guideline. However, there are distinct differences between the two, leading to their categorization as two distinct reporting guidelines (G-SURE and G-SIRE). In the absence of a definitive reporting guideline for survey reports, it was imperative to design a suitable guideline through a process of referencing analogous reporting guidelines, including RECORD [8], STROBE [11], and PROCESS [9]. Although it is almost similar to surveillance reports, there are some differences in the source and quality of the data.

The policy reports address subjects, such as the formulation (development), implementation (execution), and evaluation of the policies, in addition to recommendations, including legal statutes and systems related to the activities of healthcare providers, as well as supply and demand. Given the heterogeneity of the policy reports, it can be challenging to address them with a single reporting guideline. Considering this, G-SCOPE has classified the reports into the following categories: reports of political case reports/reviews, policy development and planning, enactment, and amendment of laws and regulations, and policy performance and/or effectiveness evaluation. Reports are differentiated in terms of the type and method of reporting and the content of the policies in terms of results.

Regarding recommendation reports, clinical practice guideline reports, such as RIGHT [15] and AGREE [16], have already been established. However, given the association of the disease with public health concerns, such as the prevention of highly transmissible diseases (e.g., sexually transmitted diseases, tuberculosis, etc.), a distinct reporting guideline (G-RECO) was formulated.

Due to the concurrent development of multiple reporting guidelines in this study, it is possible that the content of each individual guideline has not been thoroughly reviewed. Consequently, there may be concerns about the adequacy of external review, as there is a limited number of experts in Korea who are qualified to assess reporting guidelines. However, this study is significant in that it has developed several reporting guidelines with only domestic experts and that it has applied a standard methodology for developing reporting guidelines.

In the future, the implementation of policy measures, such as training, template creation, and monitoring, will be essential to ensure that the items in these reporting guidelines are properly integrated into submitted manuscripts. Furthermore, evaluations of the quality of future reports will be required.

Ethics Statement: Not applicable.

Funding Source: This research was supported by funds (2023-02-59-0001, 2023-05-21-0001) from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency.

Acknowledgments: None.

Conflict of Interest: Soo Young Kim, Sukhyun Ryu, So Yeon Ryu, Mina Ha, and Bo Youl Choi are editorial board members of the journal, but were not involved in the review process of this manuscript. Otherwise, there is no conflict of interest to declare.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization: SYK, BYC, SH. Data curation: SYK, SHR, SYR, SH, MNH, BYC, WYJ. Funding acquisition: SYK, BYC. Investigation: SYK, SHR, SYR, SH, MNH, BYC, WYJ. Methodology: SYK, WYJ, SH. Writing – original draft: SYK, BYC. Writing – review & editing: SYK, SHR, SYR, SH, MNH, BYC, WYJ.