Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in articles hand and wrist pathology: a review

Background: An increasing number of systematic reviews are published on an annual basis. Although perusal of the full text of articles is preferable, abstracts are sometimes relied upon to guide clinical decisions. Despite this, the abstracts of systematic reviews have historically been poorly reported. We evaluated the reporting quality of systematic review abstracts within hand and wrist pathology literature. Methods: We searched MEDLINE®, EMBASE and Cochrane Library from inception to December 2017 for systematic reviews in hand and wrist pathology using the 12-item PRISMA-A checklist to assess abstract reporting quality. Results: A total of 114 abstracts were included. Most related to fracture (38%) or arthritis (17%) management. Forty-seven systematic reviews (41%) included meta-analysis. Mean PRISMA-A score was 3.6/12 with Cochrane reviews having the highest mean score and hand-specific journals having the lowest. Abstracts longer than 300 words (mean difference [MD]: 1.43, 95% CI [0.74, 2.13]; p <0.001) and systematic reviews with meta-analysis (MD: 0.64, 95% CI [0.05, 1.22]; p = 0.034) were associated with higher scores. Unstructured abstracts were associated with lower scores (MD: –0.65, 95% CI [–1.28, –0.02]; p = 0.044). A limitation of this study is the possible exclusion of relevant studies that were not published in the English language. Conclusion: Abstracts of systematic reviews pertaining to hand and wrist pathology have been suboptimally reported as assessed by the PRISMA-A checklist. Improvements in reporting quality could be achieved by endorsement of PRISMA-A guidelines by authors and journals, and reducing constraints on abstract length.

Download Full-text

Inconsistencies are common between non-Cochrane systematic reviews and their protocols registered in the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) but were seldom explained

10.21203/rs.2.18725/v2 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Kaiyan Hu ◽

Ting Zhang ◽

Weiyi Zhang ◽

Qi Zhou ◽

Mengyao Jiang New ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Reviews ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Reporting Quality ◽

Fundamental Solutions ◽

Cochrane Reviews ◽

Or Methodology ◽

Retrospective Comparative Study ◽

The Impact

Abstract Background: Protocols of systematic reviews allow for planning and documentation of review methods and thus improve the transparency of the reviews process. However, pre-registration of a protocol is not enough, the author also need to follow it. PROSPERO is an open-access online database for the registration of non-Cochrane systematic reviews. The purpose of this study is to compare published non-Cochrane reviews with their pre-registered protocols on PROSPERO to determine what changes, if any, have been made, and how likely these changes are to impact the quality of systematic review. Methods: This is a retrospective comparative study. We searched for protocols on PROSPERO platform that were registered in 2018 and then selected the protocols that full text have been published as of January 1st 2019. Published full texts were identified through the protocol's final publication citation. Two authors independently compared and identified changes between protocols and systematic reviews and then evaluated the impact (improve, reduce, or unclear) of these changes on the reporting or methodology quality of reviews. Descriptive statistics of percentage (%) and frequency (n) were conducted. Results: We identified 39 pairs, all of which exhibited changes. “Search strategy”(92%, n=36), “data extraction”(90%, n=35), “data synthesis”(77%, n=30), “outcome”(64%, n=24), and “subgroup analysis”(64%, n=24) all showed significant changes. All changes to only one review were considered to improve the reporting or methodology quality, and the remaining 97% of reviews (n=38) contained changes that were considered to reduce the methodology or reporting quality or that had an unclear impact on systematic reviews. Conclusions: Changes between the non-Cochrane systematic reviews and their protocols recorded on PROSPERO were widespread. Some of the changes reduced the methodology or reporting quality of systematic reviews or had an unclear impact. Measures should be taken to further improve the transparency of the non-Cochrane systematic reviews. Adding a new item in updated “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses” (PRISMA) and “Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology” (MOOSE) to guide reporting and explaining the changes, as well as advising peer reviewers (and editors) to check the reviews against the protocols are two suggested fundamental solutions.

Download Full-text

A Systematic Review on Natural Medicines for the Prevention and Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease with Meta-Analyses of Intervention Effect of Ginkgo

The American Journal of Chinese Medicine ◽

10.1142/s0192415x14500335 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 42 (03) ◽

pp. 505-521 ◽

Cited By ~ 26

Author(s):

Mengmeng Yang ◽

Dan Dan Xu ◽

Yan Zhang ◽

Xinyou Liu ◽

Robin Hoeven ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Alzheimer’S Disease ◽

Alzheimer's Disease ◽

English Language ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Significant Heterogeneity ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Natural Medicines

We performed a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy of natural medicines for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Disease-specific and intervention terms were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and PsycINFO to identify RCTs for the AD intervention of natural medicines, and searched for literatures in English language. The RCTs compared natural medicines and either placebo or orthodox medication in AD patients. The quality of literature was evaluated by Jadad's score and the Cochrane assessing tool to reduce the risk of bias. Meta-analysis and the heterogeneity of results across the trials were performed. Out of the literatures, 21 clinical reports were included in this review that satisfied the particular selection criteria. Apart from Ginkgo, other treatments we came across had minimal benefits and/or the methodological quality of the available trials was poor. The meta-analyses showed that Ginkgo had better outcomes than the placebo, with the standardized mean difference (SMD) between Ginkgo and the placebo on cognition being -1.62 (95% CI: -2.69 to -0.56) and on activities of daily living being -1.55 (95% CI: -2.55 to -0.55), with the existence of significant heterogeneity across studies. The meta-analysis for assessing the prevention effect of Ginkgo against AD suggested that risk ratio (RR) is 1.06 (95% CI: 0.92 to 1.22) between Gingko and the placebo, with no significant heterogeneity across studies (test for heterogeneity, p = 0.49). Our results suggest that Ginkgo may help established AD patients with cognitive symptoms but cannot prevent the neurodegenerative progression of the disease.

Download Full-text

Interventions for Treating Tennis Elbow: An Overview of Systematic Reviews in the Past Ten Years

10.21203/rs.3.rs-38935/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Xue Wang ◽

Jun Xiong ◽

Jun Yang ◽

Ting Yuan

Keyword(s):

Systematic Reviews ◽

Comparative Studies ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Tennis Elbow ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Reporting Quality ◽

Research Process ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Different Types

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

Download Full-text

Effectiveness and Feasibility of Internet-Based Interventions for Grief After Bereavement: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

JMIR Mental Health ◽

10.2196/29661 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (12) ◽

pp. e29661

Author(s):

Andrea E Zuelke ◽

Melanie Luppa ◽

Margrit Löbner ◽

Alexander Pabst ◽

Christine Schlapke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Posttraumatic Stress ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Complicated Grief ◽

Quality Criteria ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Quality Of Evidence ◽

Objective Quality

Background Although grief and its symptoms constitute a normal reaction to experiences of loss, some of those affected still report elevated levels of distress after an extended period, often termed complicated grief. Beneficial treatment effects of face-to-face therapies, for example, grief counseling or cognitive behavioral therapy against complicated grief, have been reported. Evaluations of internet- and mobile-based interventions targeting symptoms of grief in bereaved individuals with regard to objective quality criteria are currently lacking. Objective We aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness and feasibility of internet- and mobile-based interventions against symptoms of grief after bereavement. Methods We conducted systematic literature searches of randomized controlled trials or feasibility studies published before January 9, 2020, following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, in PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, and the Cochrane Library. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations system. We further assessed aspects of feasibility and rated quality of interventions using criteria suggested by an expert panel on mental health care (German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, and Psychosomatics). A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to assess between-group effect sizes. Results In total, 9 trials (N=1349) were included. Of these, 7 studies were analyzed meta-analytically. Significant effects were found for symptoms of grief (g=0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.77), depression (g=0.44, 95% CI 0.20-0.68), and posttraumatic stress (g=0.82, 95% CI 0.63-1.01). Heterogeneity was moderate for grief and depression (I2=48.75% and 55.19%, respectively) and low for posttraumatic stress symptoms (I2=0%). The overall quality of evidence was graded low (grief and depression) to moderate (posttraumatic stress). User satisfaction with the interventions was high, as was the quality of the interventions assessed using objective quality criteria. Conclusions Internet- or mobile-based interventions might constitute an effective treatment approach against symptoms of grief in bereaved adults. However, the small sample sizes and limited number of studies included in the review warrant further investigation. Trial Registration International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42012002100; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=131428

Download Full-text

Effectiveness and Feasibility of Internet-Based Interventions for Grief After Bereavement: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.29661 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Andrea E Zuelke ◽

Melanie Luppa ◽

Margrit Löbner ◽

Alexander Pabst ◽

Christine Schlapke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Posttraumatic Stress ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Complicated Grief ◽

Quality Criteria ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Quality Of Evidence ◽

Objective Quality

BACKGROUND Although grief and its symptoms constitute a normal reaction to experiences of loss, some of those affected still report elevated levels of distress after an extended period, often termed complicated grief. Beneficial treatment effects of face-to-face therapies, for example, grief counseling or cognitive behavioral therapy against complicated grief, have been reported. Evaluations of internet- and mobile-based interventions targeting symptoms of grief in bereaved individuals with regard to objective quality criteria are currently lacking. OBJECTIVE We aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness and feasibility of internet- and mobile-based interventions against symptoms of grief after bereavement. METHODS We conducted systematic literature searches of randomized controlled trials or feasibility studies published before January 9, 2020, following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, in PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, and the Cochrane Library. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations system. We further assessed aspects of feasibility and rated quality of interventions using criteria suggested by an expert panel on mental health care (German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, and Psychosomatics). A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to assess between-group effect sizes. RESULTS In total, 9 trials (N=1349) were included. Of these, 7 studies were analyzed meta-analytically. Significant effects were found for symptoms of grief (g=0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.77), depression (g=0.44, 95% CI 0.20-0.68), and posttraumatic stress (g=0.82, 95% CI 0.63-1.01). Heterogeneity was moderate for grief and depression (I2=48.75% and 55.19%, respectively) and low for posttraumatic stress symptoms (I2=0%). The overall quality of evidence was graded low (grief and depression) to moderate (posttraumatic stress). User satisfaction with the interventions was high, as was the quality of the interventions assessed using objective quality criteria. CONCLUSIONS Internet- or mobile-based interventions might constitute an effective treatment approach against symptoms of grief in bereaved adults. However, the small sample sizes and limited number of studies included in the review warrant further investigation. CLINICALTRIAL International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42012002100; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=131428

Download Full-text

Inconsistencies are common between non-Cochrane systematic reviews and their protocols registered in the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) but were seldom explained

10.21203/rs.2.18725/v1 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Kaiyan Hu ◽

Ting Zhang ◽

Weiyi Zhang ◽

Qi Zhou ◽

Joey S.W. Kwong ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Open Access ◽

Comparative Study ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Reporting Quality ◽

Fundamental Solutions ◽

Cochrane Reviews ◽

Retrospective Comparative Study ◽

The Impact

Abstract Background: Protocols of systematic reviews allow for planning and documentation of review methods, and thus improve the transparency of reviews process. However, pre-registered a protocol is not enough, the author also need to follow it. PROSPERO is an open-access online facility for the registration of non-Cochrane systematic reviews. The purpose of our research is to determined what changed were made between non-Cochrane reviews and their protocols in PROSPERO and how likely these changes impacted the quality of systematic review. Method: In this retrospective comparative study we electronically searched for protocols and their corresponding systematic reviews in the PROSPERO platform that were “completed and published” from January to December, 2018. Two reviewers independently identified and classified changes between the protocols and systematic reviews then evaluated the impact (improve/reduce/unclear)of these change on the reporting/methodology quality of reviews. Frequency (n), percentage (%) were used to analyze the number of changes categorically in each review and the distribution of different impact caused by these changes. Results: We identified 39 pre-registered protocols and their reviews, all of which exhibited alterations. All changes to only one review are considered to improve the reporting/methodology quality, and remaining 97% of reviews (n=38) contain changes that are categorically considered to reduce the methodology/reporting quality or that have an unclear impact on reviews. Conclusions: Differences between the non-Cochrane reviews and their protocols recorded in PROSPERO are widespread, and there have been many changes having an unclear impact on the quality of reviews. Guiding the author to report and explain the differences between protocol and reviews or even requiring authors to so at the level of journal are two fundamental solutions to further improve the transparency of the non-Cochrane reviews.

Download Full-text

Reporting of the methodological quality of search strategies in orthodontic quantitative systematic reviews

European Journal of Orthodontics ◽

10.1093/ejo/cjaa078 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Danah AlMubarak ◽

Nikolaos Pandis ◽

Martyn T Cobourne ◽

Jadbinder Seehra

Keyword(s):

Systematic Reviews ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Search Strategy ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Reporting Quality ◽

Search Strategies ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Cochrane Reviews

Summary Background This study aimed to assess the reporting of the methodological quality of search strategies undertaken in orthodontic quantitative systematic reviews (SRs) and hence their reproducibility. Materials and methods A search of a single electronic database (Medline via PubMed) was undertaken to identify interventional orthodontic SRs with meta-analysis published within a 10-year period. The Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews was also sourced. Full articles were reviewed by two assessors against the eligibility criteria. The reporting quality of each search strategy was assessed using a previously validated checklist with a score of 1 or 2 given for each of the eight items. Cumulative totals were calculated. Guided by previous research, the authors agreed the following cut-offs to categorize the overall level of quality: 8–10 (poor), 10–12 (fair), and greater than 13 (good). Results A total of 127 SRs were analysed. The overall median quality score for the reporting of the search strategy was 14 [interquartile range (IQR): 13–15]. Cochrane SRs and those originating in Europe received higher aggregate scores, whereas no difference was evident based on Prospero registration. The continent of the corresponding author predicated the overall score. Non-Cochrane reviews achieved lower overall scores compared to Cochrane reviews (−1.0, 95% confidence interval: −1.65, −0.34, P = 0.003). The most frequently searched database was EMBASE (N = 93) and the median number of authors was 5 (IQR 4–6). Authors of 26.8% of SRs searched the grey literature. Language restrictions were applied to the search strategies of 88 (69.3%) SRs. Conclusions The reporting quality of search strategies undertaken in orthodontic SRs is at a good level but differences between Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews currently exist. The reporting of searching of the grey literature and application of no language restrictions can be improved.

Download Full-text

Reporting quality of systematic reviews with Moxibustion

10.21203/rs.3.rs-38581/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Ran Tian ◽

Xuan Zhang ◽

Si-Yao Li ◽

Qi-Ying Aixinjueluo ◽

Wai Ching Lam ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Reviews ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Safety Evaluation ◽

Reporting Quality ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Duration Of Treatment ◽

Primary Analysis ◽

Related Information ◽

Meta Analyses

Abstract Background: Moxibustion is one of the major interventions of Chinese medicine (CM). The systematic reviews (SRs) are essential references for evaluating the efficacy and safety of moxibustion interventions. This study aimed to assess the reporting quality of these SRs, particularly whether necessary information related to moxibustion was adequately reported.Methods: Five Databases (including Embase, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CNKI and VIP) were systematically searched for SRs of moxibustion that were published up to 31 December 2019. The primary analysis was to assess their reporting quality based on 27-item of the Preferred Reporting Items for SRs and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and 16-item of moxibustion-related information designed according to CM theory and the STRICTOM (STandards for Reporting Interventions in Clinical Trials Of Moxibustion). Descriptive statistics were also used to analyze their baseline characteristics.Results: A total of 97 SRs of moxibustion were identified from 2011 to 2019. For 27-item of PRISMA, except item 5, 8, 16 and 23, the remaining 23 items had the reporting compliances higher than 50%, of which 2 items (item 20 and 26) were fully reporting (100%). However, for moxibustion-related information, 69.1% (67/97) SRs did not provide the specific type of moxibustion, 39.2% (38/97) lacked details regarding the materials, procedure and technique used for moxibustion, 67.0% (65/97) did not report the selection criteria of acupoints for moxibustion, 28.9% (28/97) did not provide the number or duration of treatment sessions, 69.1% (67/97) did not provide any information about safety evaluation, and 94.8% (92/97) SRs did not report the treatment environment. For 51 (55.4%) of 92 SRs that included meta-analysis, it was impossible to assess whether meta-analysis had been properly conducted due to inadequate reporting of moxibustion interventions.Conclusion: The reporting quality of SRs of moxibustion need further improvements in terms of adequate reporting of moxibustion interventions and of moxibustion-related rationales. Reporting guideline of “PRISMA extension for moxibustion interventions” should be developed thus to improve their quality.

Download Full-text

Effectiveness of Antalgic Therapies in Patients with Vertebral Bone Metastasis: A Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ◽

10.3390/ijerph18083991 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (8) ◽

pp. 3991

Author(s):

Antonio Jose Martin-Perez ◽

María Fernández-González ◽

Paula Postigo-Martin ◽

Marc Sampedro Pilegaard ◽

Carolina Fernández-Lao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Bone Metastasis ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Pharmacological Intervention ◽

Vertebral Metastasis ◽

Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

There is no systematic review that has identified existing studies evaluating the pharmacological and non-pharmacological intervention for pain management in patients with bone metastasis. To fill this gap in the literature, this systematic review with meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness of different antalgic therapies (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) in the improvement of pain of these patients. To this end, this protocol has been written according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020135762). A systematic search will be carried out in four international databases: Medline (Via PubMed), Web of Science, Cochrane Library and SCOPUS, to select the randomized controlled clinical trials. The Risk of Bias Tool developed by Cochrane will be used to assess the risk of bias and the quality of the identified studies. A narrative synthesis will be used to describe and compare the studies, and after the data extraction, random effects model and a subgroup analyses will be performed according to the type of intervention, if possible. This protocol aims to generate a systematic review that compiles and synthesizes the best and most recent evidence on the treatment of pain derived from vertebral metastasis.

Download Full-text

Lumbar Roll Usage While Sitting Reduces the Forward Head Posture in Healthy Individuals: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ◽

10.3390/ijerph18105171 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (10) ◽

pp. 5171

Author(s):

Yusuke Handa ◽

Kenya Okada ◽

Hiroshi Takasaki

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grade System ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Forward Head Posture ◽

Quality Of Evidence ◽

Head Posture ◽

Head Extension ◽

The Cochrane Library

This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated whether the use of a lumbar roll reduced forward head posture (FHP) while sitting among individuals with or without musculoskeletal disorders. EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched from their inception to August 2020. The quality of evidence for variables used in the meta-analysis was determined using the GRADE system. Five studies satisfied the criteria for data analysis. All studies included individuals without any spinal symptoms. Data from five studies on neck angle showed a statistically significant (p = 0.02) overall effect (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.77), indicating a lesser neck flexion angle while sitting with a lumbar roll than without it. Data from two studies on head angle showed a statistically significant (p = 0.04) overall effect (SMD = 0.47), indicating a lesser head extension angle while sitting with a lumbar roll than without it. In each meta-analysis, the quality of evidence was very low in the GRADE system. The use of a lumbar roll while sitting reduced FHP among individuals without spinal symptoms.

Download Full-text