A comparison of quality of abstracts of systematic reviews including meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in high-impact general medicine journals before and after the publication of PRISMA extension for abstracts: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:35
|
作者
Bigna J.J.R. [1 ]
Um L.N. [2 ]
Nansseu J.R.N. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Centre Pasteur of Cameroon, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Yaoundé
[2] University of Yaoundé I, Faculty of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Yaoundé
[3] Mother and Child Centre of the Chantal Biya Foundation, Sickle Cell Disease Unit, Yaoundé
关键词
Abstract; General medicine journal; Meta-analysis; PRISMA; Randomized controlled trial; Systematic review;
D O I
10.1186/s13643-016-0356-8
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Journal abstracts including those reporting systematic reviews (SR) should contain sufficiently clear and accurate information for adequate comprehension and interpretation. The aim was to compare the quality of reporting of abstracts of SRs including meta-analysis published in high-impact general medicine journals before and after publication of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for abstracts (PRISMA-A) released in April 2013. Methods: SRs including meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published in 2012, 2014, and 2015 in top-tier general medicine journals were searched in PubMed. Data was selected and extracted by two reviewers based on the PRISMA-A guidelines which recommend to include 12 items. The primary outcome was the adjusted mean number of items reported; the secondary outcome was the reporting of each item and factors associated with a better reporting. Adjustment was made for abstract word count and format, number of authors, PRISMA endorsement, and publication on behalf of a group. Results: We included 84 abstracts from 2012, 59 from 2014, and 61 from 2015. The mean number of items reported in 2015 (7.5; standard deviation [SD] 1.6) and in 2014 (6.8; SD 1.6) differed and did not differ from that reported in 2012 (7.2; SD 1.7), respectively; adjusted mean difference: 0.9 (95 % CI 0.4; 1.3) and -0.1 (95 % CI -0.6; 0.4). From 2012 to 2014, the quality of reporting was in regression for "strengths and limitations of evidence" and "funding"; contrariwise, it remained unchanged for the others items. Between 2012 and 2015, the quality of reporting rose up for "description of the effect", "synthesis of results", "interpretation", and "registration"; but decreased for "strengths and limitations of evidence"; it remained unchanged for the other items. The overall better reporting was associated with abstracts structured in the 8-headings format in 2014 and abstracts with a word count <300 in 2014 and 2015. Conclusions: Not surprisingly, the quality of reporting did not improve in 2014 and suboptimally improved in 2015. There is still room for improvement to meet the standards of PRISMA-A guidelines. Stricter adherence to these guidelines by authors, reviewers, and journal editors is highly warranted and will surely contribute to a better reporting. © 2016 The Author(s).
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Methotrexate for osteoarthritis: a systematic review meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Queiroz, Ivo
    Pimentel, Tulio
    Ruelas, Mariano Gallo
    Tavares, Arthur Henrique
    Barbosa, Lucas M.
    Defante, Maria L. R.
    Leandro, Giovanna N.
    Monteiro, Arthur Ribeiro
    Pimentel, Fernando Nunes
    INFLAMMOPHARMACOLOGY, 2025, 33 (01) : 135 - 144
  • [32] Garlic for hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Xiong, X. J.
    Wang, P. Q.
    Li, S. J.
    Li, X. K.
    Zhang, Y. Q.
    Wang, J.
    PHYTOMEDICINE, 2015, 22 (03) : 352 - 361
  • [33] Acupuncture for Spasticity after Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Lim, Sung Min
    Yoo, Junghee
    Lee, Euiju
    Kim, Hyun Jung
    Shin, Seungwon
    Han, Gajin
    Ahn, Hyeong Sik
    EVIDENCE-BASED COMPLEMENTARY AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE, 2015, 2015
  • [34] Danshen Formulae for Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of High-Quality Randomized Controlled Trials
    Wang, Tianqi
    Fu, Xianjun
    Wang, Zhenguo
    EVIDENCE-BASED COMPLEMENTARY AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE, 2019, 2019
  • [35] Effectiveness of medication review: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Victor Johan Bernard Huiskes
    David Marinus Burger
    Cornelia Helena Maria van den Ende
    Bartholomeus Johannes Fredericus van den Bemt
    BMC Family Practice, 18
  • [36] Effectiveness of medication review: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Huiskes, Victor Johan Bernard
    Burger, David Marinus
    van den Ende, Cornelia Helena Maria
    van den Bemt, Bartholomeus Johannes Fredericus
    BMC FAMILY PRACTICE, 2017, 18
  • [37] Chuanxiong Formulae for Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of High-Quality Randomized Controlled Trials
    Shan, Chun-Shuo
    Xu, Qing-Qing
    Shi, Yi-Hua
    Wang, Yong
    He, Zhang-Xin
    Zheng, Guo-Qing
    FRONTIERS IN PHARMACOLOGY, 2018, 9
  • [38] Traditional Chinese Medicine for the treatment of influenza: a systematic review and Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Chunya Wang
    Hao Wang
    Xinying Liu
    Dongping Xu
    Yiping Tang
    Ping Luo
    JournalofTraditionalChineseMedicine, 2014, 34 (05) : 527 - 531
  • [39] Traditional Chinese Medicine for the treatment of influenza: a systematic review and Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Wang, Chunya
    Wang, Hao
    Liu, Xinying
    Xu, Dongping
    Tang, Yiping
    Luo, Ping
    JOURNAL OF TRADITIONAL CHINESE MEDICINE, 2014, 34 (05) : 527 - 531
  • [40] Acupuncture for gouty arthritis A PRISMA-compliant protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Lee, Gamseong
    Cho, Foo Young
    Goo, Bonhyuk
    Park, Yeon-Cheol
    MEDICINE, 2020, 99 (49) : E23527