STROBE Checklist Checker
Check your cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional study against the STROBE reporting checklist before submission.
Check my manuscript, it's freeNo account required · Results in <2 minutes · PDF, Word & LaTeX
What the STROBE checklist requires
STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology) is the EQUATOR-endorsed reporting guideline for observational research, cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. The STROBE checklist has 22 items spanning the title and abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and funding. Many medical journals require STROBE-compliant reporting for observational studies. CheckMyManuscript flags missing or structurally incomplete STROBE items, such as an undefined study design, unreported eligibility criteria, or absent handling of bias and confounding, so you can address them before submission. It checks presence and structure, not methodological adequacy.
STROBE items, and what CMM checks
Each item below maps to the STROBE checklist. CMM flags presence and structural signals; methodological adequacy is editorial and needs human review.
Title & abstract
✓ CMM checks thisIndicates the study design with a common term in the title or abstract; balanced summary of what was done and found.
Flag: title does not name the design (cohort / case-control / cross-sectional).
Source: strobe-statement.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Study design & setting
✓ CMM checks thisKey design elements stated early, plus setting, locations, and relevant dates (recruitment, exposure, follow-up, data collection).
Source: strobe-statement.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Participants & eligibility
✓ CMM checks thisEligibility criteria, sources, and methods of selection; for matched studies, matching criteria.
Source: strobe-statement.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Variables, data sources & measurement
✓ CMM checks thisOutcomes, exposures, predictors, confounders, and effect modifiers defined, with sources and measurement methods.
Source: strobe-statement.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Bias, study size & statistical methods
✓ CMM checks thisEfforts to address bias, how study size was arrived at, and statistical methods including confounding control and missing data.
CMM flags if a confounding/bias subsection is absent; it cannot judge whether adjustment was adequate.
Source: strobe-statement.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Results, participants & descriptive data
✓ CMM checks thisNumbers at each stage (e.g. eligible, included, analysed), reasons for non-participation, and descriptive characteristics.
Flag: no account of participants lost at each stage (a flow diagram is encouraged).
Source: strobe-statement.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Limitations & funding
✓ CMM checks thisDiscussion of limitations including sources of bias, and the source of funding and funder role.
Source: strobe-statement.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Causal interpretation appropriateness
Editorial, not auto-checkableWhether the strength of causal language matches an observational design.
Editorial judgement, outside the scope of an automated checker.
Source: equator-network.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
This page reflects the current STROBE Statement checklist (22 items) for observational studies. CheckMyManuscript checks for the presence, structure, and likely-completeness signals of each item; it does not assess methodological quality and does not replace peer review. STROBE extensions exist for specific designs (e.g. STROBE-MR, RECORD); use the one that matches your study. Verify the live checklist before submitting, last checked 16 June 2026.
STROBE is the reporting standard for observational research, cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. Medical journals routinely expect STROBE-compliant reporting and a completed checklist for these designs. CheckMyManuscript screens your manuscript for the presence and structure of each STROBE item so preventable gaps are caught before submission.
STROBE and its extensions
The core STROBE checklist has 22 items. For particular designs and data types, STROBE has official extensions, for example STROBE-MR for Mendelian randomisation studies and RECORD for studies using routinely collected health data. If your study fits an extension, report against that extension as well as the core checklist.
What CheckMyManuscript checks, and what it does not
CheckMyManuscript flags structural signals: a study design not named in the title, missing eligibility criteria, no reported handling of confounding or bias, or an absent funding statement. It does not determine whether confounding was adequately controlled, whether the causal interpretation is justified, or whether the analysis was appropriate. Those are methodological judgements for peer and editorial review. Use the checker to remove preventable reporting gaps, not as a substitute for expert assessment.
Also see: CONSORT checklist checker | PRISMA checklist checker | The Lancet submission checker
STROBE-specific checks
Section presence
Flags missing STROBE items across methods, results, and discussion.
Design declared
Checks the study design is named in the title/abstract.
Eligibility & setting
Flags absent eligibility criteria, setting, or key dates.
Confounding & bias
Flags if methods to address confounding or bias are not reported.
Participant accounting
Flags if numbers at each stage are not reported.
Funding statement
Flags an absent funding/role-of-funder statement.
Checks relevant to this topic
Part of our 80+ automated checks
Design named
Study design stated in title/abstract.
Eligibility criteria
Participant eligibility and selection reported.
Confounding addressed
Confounding-control methods reported.
Participant numbers
Numbers at each stage reported.
Funding statement
Funding source and role 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Frequently asked questions
STROBE applies to the three main observational designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. Design-specific extensions exist (for example STROBE-MR for Mendelian randomisation and RECORD for routinely collected health data); use the extension that matches your study when one applies.
No. CheckMyManuscript checks the presence, structure, and likely-completeness signals of STROBE items, for example, whether the design is named, eligibility criteria are reported, and confounding is addressed. It does not judge whether the analysis adequately controlled confounding, and it does not replace peer or editorial review.
STROBE does not mandate a flow diagram, but it asks you to report the numbers of individuals at each stage (eligible, included, analysed) and reasons for non-participation. Many authors present this as a flow diagram, and reviewers expect the numbers to be traceable.
Many medical and epidemiology journals, including titles in the Lancet, JAMA, and BMJ families, require or strongly recommend STROBE-compliant reporting for observational studies, often requesting a completed checklist with page references at submission.