Epidemiology, quality, and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of nursing interventions published in Chinese journals

被引:11
|
作者
Zhang, Juxia [1 ]
Wang, Jiancheng [2 ]
Han, Lin [1 ]
Zhang, Fengwa [2 ]
Cao, Jianxun [1 ]
Ma, Yuxia [3 ]
机构
[1] Gansu Prov Hosp, Dept Nursing, Lanzhou, Gansu, Peoples R China
[2] Lanzhou Univ, Sch Basic Med Sci, Evidence Based Med Ctr, Inst Tradit Chinese & Western Med, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China
[3] Northwest Univ Nationalities, Lanzhou, Gansu, Peoples R China
关键词
Chinese journals; methodologic quality; systematic reviews; METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY; MEASUREMENT TOOL; AMSTAR;
D O I
10.1016/j.outlook.2014.11.020
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Objectives: Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) of nursing interventions have become increasingly popular in China. This review provides the first examination of epidemiological characteristics of these SRs as well as compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews guidelines. The purpose of this study was to examine epidemiologic and reporting characteristics as well as the methodologic quality of SRs and MAs of nursing interventions published in Chinese journals. Methods: Four Chinese databases were searched (the Chinese Biomedicine Literature Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Full-text Database, Chinese Journal Full-text Database, and Wanfang Database) for SRs and MAs of nursing intervention from inception through June 2013. Data were extracted into Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA). The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses checklists were used to assess methodologic quality and reporting characteristics, respectively. Results: A total of 144 SRs were identified, most (97.2%) of which used "systematic review" or "meta-analyses" in the titles. None of the reviews had been updated. Nearly half (41%) were written by nurses, and more than half (61%) were reported in specialist journals. The most common conditions studied were endocrine, nutritional and metabolic diseases, and neoplasms. Most (70.8%) reported information about quality assessment, whereas less than half (25%) reported assessing for publication bias. None of the reviews reported a conflict of interest. Conclusions: Although many SRs of nursing interventions have been published in Chinese journals, the quality of these reviews is of concern. As a potential key source of information for nurses and nursing administrators, not only were many of these reviews incomplete in the information they provided, but also some results were misleading. Improving the quality of SRs of nursing interventions conducted and published by nurses in China is urgently needed in order to increase the value of these studies.
引用
收藏
页码:446 / 455
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Epidemiology characteristics, reporting characteristics, and methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on traditional Chinese medicine nursing interventions published in Chinese journals
    Yang, Min
    Jiang, Li
    Wang, Aihong
    Xu, Guihua
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING PRACTICE, 2017, 23 (01)
  • [2] Epidemiology, Quality, and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Acupuncture Interventions Published in Chinese Journals
    Ma, Bin
    Qi, Guo-qing
    Lin, Xiao-ting
    Wang, Ting
    Chen, Zhi-min
    Yang, Ke-hu
    JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE AND COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE, 2012, 18 (09) : 813 - 817
  • [3] Epidemiology, quality and reporting characteristics of meta-analyses of observational studies published in Chinese journals
    Zhang, Zhe-wen
    Cheng, Juan
    Liu, Zhuan
    Ma, Ji-chun
    Li, Jin-long
    Wang, Jing
    Yang, Ke-hu
    BMJ OPEN, 2015, 5 (12):
  • [4] Epidemiology, Quality and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Traditional Chinese Medicine Interventions Published in Chinese Journals
    Ma, Bin
    Guo, Jiwu
    Qi, Guoqing
    Li, Haimin
    Peng, Jiye
    Zhang, Yulong
    Ding, Yanqin
    Yang, Kehu
    PLOS ONE, 2011, 6 (05):
  • [5] Evaluation of Methodological and Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Published in Veterinary Journals with AMSTAR
    Uzabaci, Ender
    Can, Fatma Ezgi
    KAFKAS UNIVERSITESI VETERINER FAKULTESI DERGISI, 2023, 29 (06) : 665 - 671
  • [6] Epidemiology, methodological and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of nursing interventions published in China
    Shi, Chunhu
    Zhu, Lin
    Wang, Xue
    Qin, Chunxia
    Xu, Qi
    Tian, Jinhui
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING PRACTICE, 2014, 20 (06) : 689 - 700
  • [7] Quality of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses: PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses)
    Walther, S.
    Schuetz, G. M.
    Hamm, B.
    Dewey, M.
    ROFO-FORTSCHRITTE AUF DEM GEBIET DER RONTGENSTRAHLEN UND DER BILDGEBENDEN VERFAHREN, 2011, 183 (12): : 1106 - 1110
  • [8] Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews or meta-analyses in nursing field in China
    Jin, Ying-hui
    Ma, En-ting
    Gao, Wei-jie
    Hua, Wei
    Dou, Hao-ying
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING PRACTICE, 2014, 20 (01) : 70 - 78
  • [9] Characteristics, methodological, and reporting quality of scoping reviews published in nursing journals: A systematic review
    Woo, Brigitte Fong Yeong
    Tam, Wilson Wai San
    Williams, Michelle Y. Y.
    Yong, Jenna Qing Yun Ow
    Cheong, Zu Yu
    Ong, Yoke Chin
    Poon, Sum Nok
    Goh, Yong Shian
    JOURNAL OF NURSING SCHOLARSHIP, 2023, 55 (04) : 874 - 885
  • [10] Is Quality and Completeness of Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Published in High Impact Radiology Journals Associated with Citation Rates?
    van der Pol, Christian B.
    McInnes, Matthew D. F.
    Petrcich, William
    Tunis, Adam S.
    Hanna, Ramez
    PLOS ONE, 2015, 10 (03):