scholarly journals Ultrasound features of Achilles enthesitis in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii19-ii34
Author(s):  
Aimie Patience ◽  
Martijn P Steultjens ◽  
Gordon J Hendry

Abstract Objectives The objectives were to evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of ultrasound (US) studies of Achilles enthesitis in people with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), to identify the definitions and scoring systems adopted and to estimate the prevalence of ultrasound features of Achilles enthesitis in this population. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted using the AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, ProQuest and Web of Science databases. Eligible studies had to measure US features of Achilles enthesitis in people with PsA. Methodological quality was assessed using a modified Downs and Black Quality Index tool. US protocol reporting was assessed using a checklist informed by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the reporting of US studies in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. Results Fifteen studies were included. One study was scored as high methodological quality, 9 as moderate and 5 as low. Significant heterogeneity was observed in the prevalence, descriptions, scoring of features and quality of US protocol reporting. Prevalence estimates (% of entheses) reported included hypoechogenicity [mean 5.9% (s.d. 0.9)], increased thickness [mean 22.1% (s.d. 12.2)], erosions [mean 3.3% (s.d. 2.5)], calcifications [mean 42.6% (s.d. 15.6)], enthesophytes [mean 41.3% (s.d. 15.6)] and Doppler signal [mean 11.8% (s.d. 10.1)]. Conclusions The review highlighted significant variations in prevalence figures that could potentially be explained by the range of definitions and scoring criteria available, but also due to the inconsistent reporting of US protocols. Uptake of the EULAR recommendations and using the latest definitions and validated scoring criteria would allow for a better understanding of the frequency and severity of individual features of pathology.

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igho Onakpoya ◽  
Rohini Terry ◽  
Edzard Ernst

The purpose of this paper is to assess the efficacy of green coffee extract (GCE) as a weight loss supplement, using data from human clinical trials. Electronic and nonelectronic searches were conducted to identify relevant articles, with no restrictions in time or language. Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the methodological quality of included studies. Five eligible trials were identified, and three of these were included. All studies were associated with a high risk of bias. The meta-analytic result reveals a significant difference in body weight in GCE compared with placebo (mean difference: kg; 95%CI: , ). The magnitude of the effect is moderate, and there is significant heterogeneity amongst the studies. It is concluded that the results from these trials are promising, but the studies are all of poor methodological quality. More rigorous trials are needed to assess the usefulness of GCE as a weight loss tool.


2020 ◽  
Vol 99 (13) ◽  
pp. 1453-1460
Author(s):  
D. Qin ◽  
F. Hua ◽  
H. He ◽  
S. Liang ◽  
H. Worthington ◽  
...  

The objectives of this study were to assess the reporting quality and methodological quality of split-mouth trials (SMTs) published during the past 2 decades and to determine whether there has been an improvement in their quality over time. We searched the MEDLINE database via PubMed to identify SMTs published in 1998, 2008, and 2018. For each included SMT, we used the CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 guideline, CONSORT for within-person trial (WPT) extension, and a new 3-item checklist to assess its trial reporting quality (TRQ), WPT-specific reporting quality (WRQ), and SMT-specific methodological quality (SMQ), respectively. Multivariable generalized linear models were performed to analyze the quality of SMTs over time, adjusting for potential confounding factors. A total of 119 SMTs were included. The mean overall score for the TRQ (score range, 0 to 32), WRQ (0 to 15), and SMQ (0 to 3) was 15.77 (SD 4.51), 6.06 (2.06), and 1.12 (0.70), respectively. The primary outcome was clearly defined in only 28 SMTs (23.5%), and only 27 (22.7%) presented a replicable sample size calculation. Only 45 SMTs (37.8%) provided the rationale for using a split-mouth design. The correlation between body sites was reported in only 5 studies (4.2%) for sample size calculation and 4 studies (3.4%) for statistical results. Only 2 studies (1.7%) performed an appropriate sample size calculation, and 46 (38.7%) chose appropriate statistical methods, both accounting for the correlation among treatment groups and the clustering/multiplicity of measurements within an individual. Results of regression analyses suggested that the TRQ of SMTs improved significantly with time ( P < 0.001), while there was no evidence of improvement in WRQ or SMQ. Both the reporting quality and methodological quality of SMTs still have much room for improvement. Concerted efforts are needed to improve the execution and reporting of SMTs.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 4464-4464
Author(s):  
Aryan Abadeh ◽  
Carolina de Carvalho Ligocki ◽  
Kuan Chung Wang ◽  
Thomasin Adams-Webber ◽  
Victor S. Blanchette ◽  
...  

Abstract PURPOSE: To semi-quantitatively assess the evidence on the value of ultrasound (US) for assessment of hemophilic arthropathy (HA) in children and adults. We sought to provide the answer to the following questions: (1) Are currently available US techniques accurate for early diagnosis of pathological findings? (2) Can treatment reduce the incidence of US-detectable findings in HA? (3) Do US scores correlate with clinical/radiological constructs in the evaluation of HA? (4) Are US findings associated with functional status of joints? METHODS: Articles were screened using MEDLINE (n= 519), EMBASE (n= 493), and the Cochrane Library (n=24) (1946-2015). Two independent reviewers assessed the reporting quality and the methodological quality of articles by using the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tools respectively. 4 different US scanning protocols for assessment of hemophilic joints were compared based on scanning times and anatomical landmarks. 6 US scoring systems were also compared according to number of soft-tissue and osteochondral parameters evaluated. RESULTS: Out of 16 full-text articles, 9 diagnostic accuracy studies (417 patients with hemophilia A, B and von Willebrand's disease) were evaluated for reporting and methodological quality using STARD and QUADAS-2 assessment tools respectively. Seven studies were of moderate reporting quality and 2 of low reporting quality. When using QUADAS-2, 1 study was of high, 3 of moderate, 2 of low, and 3 of very low methodological quality. Out of 9 diagnostic accuracy studies, 1 evaluated HA in ankles, knees, elbows, and shoulders while 3 evaluated ankles, knees, and elbows and only 2 evaluated ankles and knees. 2 more studies focused solely on knees and 1 on shoulders. Six US interpretation scores were reviewed and compared. All 6 articles included synovial hypertrophy in their evaluation. 5 articles incorporated cartilage modification while only 2 articles assessed hemosiderin deposition in their evaluation. Among these 6 scores, 4 were of moderate reporting quality, 1 of low and 1 of very low reporting quality. When using QUADAS-2 however, only 1 study was of high, 1 of moderate, 2 of of low, and 2 of very low methodological quality. Four US scanning protocols were also assessed, all evaluated the joints in both prone and supine positions. 3 suggested an extended scanning procedure of up to 30 minutes per joint, while 1 proposed a more simplified procedure. Two scanning protocols evaluated knees and ankles, while one focused on elbows. Only one scanning protocol included ankles, knees, and elbows in its assessment. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence (Grade I) to recommend US as an accurate technique for early diagnosis of pathologic findings, to demonstrate that US scores correlate with clinical/radiological constructs, that treatment can reduce the incidence of US-detectable findings in HA, and to prove an association between US findings and the functional status of the joint. Further studies are required to establish standardized US scanning protocols and scoring systems and to determine US as a valuable tool for early diagnosis of hemophilic arthropathy (HA) in children and adults. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This work was funded by Novo Nordisk Health Care AG. Disclosures Abadeh: Novo Nordisk Health Care AG: Other: Funding. Blanchette:Bayer Healthcare: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Octapharma: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxter Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board, Research Funding. Doria:Novo Nordisk Health Care AG: Other: Funding.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Shen ◽  
Jinke Huang ◽  
Tao Qiu

Background: To systematically appraise and synthesize evidence, we conducted an overview of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) on acupuncture for stable angina pectoris (SAP).Methods: Eight databases were searched for SRs/MAs of acupuncture on SAP. The methodological quality, reporting quality, and evidence quality were evaluated by Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2), the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system, respectively.Results: A total of seven published SRs/MAs met the inclusion criteria. According to the evaluation results of AMSTAR-2, two studies were considered as of moderate quality; the remaining five were considered as of very low quality. According to the evaluation results of the PRISMA checklist, only one study reported the checklist in its entirety, while others had reporting deficiencies. According to GRADE, a total of 18 outcome indicators extracted from the included studies were evaluated. The evidence quality was very low in three, low in three, moderate in eight, and high in four.Conclusion: Acupuncture may be beneficial for SAP from the currently published evidence. However, this conclusion must be interpreted cautiously due to the generally low methodological quality, reporting quality, and evidence quality of the included studies. More rigorous, more standardized and comprehensive SRs/MAs are needed to provide strong evidence for convincing conclusions.


Author(s):  
Thais Regina de Mattos Lourenço ◽  
◽  
Vasilis Pergialiotis ◽  
Constantin M. Durnea ◽  
Abdullatif Elfituri ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction and hypothesis Variations in outcome measures and reporting of outcomes in trials on surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) using synthetic mesh have been evaluated and reported. However, the quality of outcome reporting, methodology of trials and their publication parameters are important considerations in the process of development of Core Outcome Sets. We aimed to evaluate these characteristics in randomized controlled trials on surgery for POP using mesh. Methods Secondary analysis of randomized controlled trials on surgical treatments using synthetic mesh for POP previously included in a systematic review developing an inventory of reported outcomes and outcome measures. The methodological quality was investigated with the modified Jadad criteria. Outcome reporting quality was evaluated with the MOMENT criteria. Publication parameters included publishing journal, impact factor and year of publication. Results Of the 71 previously reviewed studies published from 2000 to 2017, the mean JADAD score was 3.59 and the mean MOMENT score was 4.63. Quality of outcomes (MOMENT) was related to methodological quality (JADAD) (rho = 0.662; p = 0.000) and to year of publication (rho = 0.262; p = 0.028). Conclusions Methodological quality and outcome reporting quality appear correlated. However, publication characteristics do not have strong associations with the methodological quality of the studies. Evaluation of the quality of outcomes, methodology and publication characteristics are all an indispensable part of a staged process for the development of Core Outcome and Outcome Measure Sets.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xue Wang ◽  
Jun Xiong ◽  
Jun Yang ◽  
Ting Yuan

Abstract purpose: Tennis elbow is a common orthopedic disease, and there are many ways to treat it. This overview aimed to summarize the evidence of different treatments for tennis elbows, so as to provide the best guidance for clinical treatment.Methods: Use computer to search CNKI, WanFang database, WeiPu database, CBM database, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase from the time of establishment to May 31, 2019.Te Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and latest Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) checklists were used to assess reporting characteristics and methodological quality, respectively.Results: A total of 37 references were included. Methodological quality and reporting quality were unsatisfactory. Methodological quality was generally low and many key items were not reported. Some research reports are of high quality, but there is no trial registration and protocol written in advance, which may lead to some bias in the research process. The most frequent problems included non-registration of study protocol, absence of a list of excluded studies, and unclear acknowledgment of conflicts of interests. The different types of interventions included have been shown to relieve pain, improve quality of life, and restore elbow function, but there has been a lack of comparative studies.Conclusion: The reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analysis studies were sub-optimal, which demands further improvement. Comparative studies of different types of interventions are needed to determine unclear.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015017071


PeerJ ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. e3129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leilei Xia ◽  
Jing Xu ◽  
Thomas J. Guzzo

Purpose To assess the overall quality of published urological meta-analyses and identify predictive factors for high quality. Materials and Methods We systematically searched PubMed to identify meta-analyses published from January 1st, 2011 to December 31st, 2015 in 10 predetermined major paper-based urology journals. The characteristics of the included meta-analyses were collected, and their reporting and methodological qualities were assessed by the PRISMA checklist (27 items) and AMSTAR tool (11 items), respectively. Descriptive statistics were used for individual items as a measure of overall compliance, and PRISMA and AMSTAR scores were calculated as the sum of adequately reported domains. Logistic regression was used to identify predictive factors for high qualities. Results A total of 183 meta-analyses were included. The mean PRISMA and AMSTAR scores were 22.74 ± 2.04 and 7.57 ± 1.41, respectively. PRISMA item 5, protocol and registration, items 15 and 22, risk of bias across studies, items 16 and 23, additional analysis had less than 50% adherence. AMSTAR item 1, “a priori” design, item 5, list of studies and item 10, publication bias had less than 50% adherence. Logistic regression analyses showed that funding support and “a priori” design were associated with superior reporting quality, following PRISMA guideline and “a priori” design were associated with superior methodological quality. Conclusions Reporting and methodological qualities of recently published meta-analyses in major paper-based urology journals are generally good. Further improvement could potentially be achieved by strictly adhering to PRISMA guideline and having “a priori” protocol.


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mimi M. Kim ◽  
Lynley Pound ◽  
Isabella Steffensen ◽  
Geoffrey M. Curtin

Abstract Introduction Several published systematic reviews have examined the potential associations between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking, but their methodological and/or reporting quality have not yet been assessed. This systematic quality review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) 2 to evaluate the quality of systematic reviews investigating potential associations between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking. Materials and methods PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO were searched from 01 January 2007 to 24 June 2020. Methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR 2, and reporting quality was assessed using PRISMA guidelines. Results Of 331 potentially relevant systematic reviews, 20 met predefined inclusion criteria. Most reviews (n = 15; 75%) reported on e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking cessation, while three reported on e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking initiation (15%); and two reported on cigarette smoking initiation and cessation (10%). According to AMSTAR 2 guidelines, 18 of the 20 reviews (90%) were “critically low” in overall confidence of the results, while two were ranked “low.” Additionally, reporting quality varied across the reviews, with only 60% reporting at least half of the PRISMA items. Discussion Methodological limitations were identified across reviews examining potential associations between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking behaviors, indicating that findings from these reviews should be interpreted with caution. Conclusions Future systematic reviews in this field should strive to adhere to AMSTAR 2 and PRISMA guidelines, to provide high quality syntheses of the available data with transparent and complete reporting.


2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (8) ◽  
pp. 852-856 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Wasiak ◽  
A. Y. Shen ◽  
R. Ware ◽  
T. J. O’Donohoe ◽  
C. M. Faggion

The objective of this study was to assess methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews in hand and wrist pathology. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to November 2016 for relevant studies. Reporting quality was evaluated using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and methodological quality using a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews, the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Descriptive statistics and linear regression were used to identify features associated with improved methodological quality. A total of 91 studies were included in the analysis. Most reviews inadequately reported PRISMA items regarding study protocol, search strategy and bias and AMSTAR items regarding protocol, publication bias and funding. Systematic reviews published in a plastics journal, or which included more authors, were associated with higher AMSTAR scores. A large proportion of systematic reviews within hand and wrist pathology literature score poorly with validated methodological assessment tools, which may affect the reliability of their conclusions. Level of evidence: I


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Zipan Lyu ◽  
Zhongyu Huang ◽  
Fengbin Liu ◽  
Zhengkun Hou

Objective. To access the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) about Chinese medical treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Methods. The PubMed, Wanfang Data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database (VIP), Chinese Biomedical (CBM), Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to June 2020. Two researchers independently screened the literature considering the eligibility criteria. Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire (OQAQ), Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2), and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to assess the methodological and reporting quality of the included reports. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to evaluate the level of evidence in each report. Results. Thirty-three SRs/MAs met the inclusion criteria. The OQAQ results showed that defects in the methodological quality of 17/32 reports were major, with scores of 3 points. Analyzing a single item as the object, search strategies (item 2), and risk of bias in individual studies (item 4) was considered poor. The AMSTAR 2 results showed that 25.4% of the items were not reported, and 7.8% of the items were only partially reported. The overall assessment of AMSTAR 2 showed the majority of systematic reviews and meta-analyses were of low/very low (31/33, 93.9%) methodological quality, with a lack of protocol registration and excluded study list. The PRISMA results showed that 19.9% of items were not reported, and 15.2% of items were only partially reported, due to a lack of protocol registration and study selection methods. The methodological and reporting quality of the included studies was generally poor. Evidence evaluation with GRADE showed that most (31/33) of the included studies had low or very low levels of evidence. Conclusion. The methodological and reporting quality of SRs/MAs about Chinese medical treatment for GERD is generally poor. The main problems included incomplete search strategies, risk of bias in individual studies, the lack of protocol registration and excluded study list, and incorrect study selection methods.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document