Observational Study Checker (STROBE)

Validate cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional study manuscripts against STROBE guidelines, epidemiological reporting standards, and journal requirements.

Check my manuscript, it's free

No account required · Results in <2 minutes · PDF, Word & LaTeX

STROBE compliance for observational studies

Observational studies—cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional designs—are the backbone of epidemiology and public health research. STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) provides a 22-item checklist that specifies how to report study design, setting, participants, variables, data sources, bias, study size, statistical methods, and results. Many observational studies are criticized for incomplete reporting of confounders, selection bias, or missing data handling. CheckMyManuscript validates observational study manuscripts against STROBE requirements and common epidemiology journal standards.

STROBE compliance checks

STROBE 22-item checklist

Validate your manuscript against all STROBE checklist items for your study design.

Study design identification

Verify that cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional design is explicitly stated.

Participant selection

Check eligibility criteria, sources of selection, and matching methods are described.

Confounder reporting

Flag missing descriptions of confounders, adjustment methods, or DAG diagrams.

Missing data handling

Verify how missing data was addressed in the analysis.

Sensitivity analyses

Check that sensitivity or subgroup analyses are reported.

Checks relevant to this topic

Part of our 80+ automated checks

STROBE compliance

Key STROBE checklist items for the specific study design.

Study design stated

Cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional explicitly identified.

Confounder reporting

Potential confounders identified and adjustment methods described.

Missing data

How missing data was handled is documented.

Effect estimates

Odds ratios, hazard ratios, or risk ratios with confidence intervals reported.

The practical edge your peers already use

Across disciplines and career stages, researchers reduce bottlenecks and submit with confidence: clearer drafts, easier guideline compliance, and less back and forth with co‑authors and reviewers.

I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.

Ilyass, Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

Ilyass

Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.

Manon, Master's Student in Speech Therapy

Manon

Master's Student in Speech Therapy

I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.

Afonso, PhD Candidate, UFPE

Afonso

PhD Candidate, UFPE

It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.

Félix, Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

Félix

Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.

Oleg, Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Oleg

Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.

Ilyass, Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

Ilyass

Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.

Manon, Master's Student in Speech Therapy

Manon

Master's Student in Speech Therapy

I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.

Afonso, PhD Candidate, UFPE

Afonso

PhD Candidate, UFPE

It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.

Félix, Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

Félix

Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.

Oleg, Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Oleg

Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Frequently asked questions

STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) provides reporting guidelines for cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. Use STROBE whenever your study is observational (non-randomized). Most epidemiology and public health journals require STROBE compliance.

CONSORT is for randomized controlled trials; STROBE is for observational studies. They address different study designs with different reporting requirements. If your study randomizes participants, use CONSORT. If it observes existing groups, use STROBE.

STROBE recommends a flow diagram showing participant numbers at each stage (identified, eligible, included, analyzed) and reasons for exclusion. While not always mandatory, it significantly improves transparency and is expected by most reviewers.