scholarly journals Quality of reporting of systematic reviews and meta‐analyses of surgical randomized clinical trials

BJS Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 535-542
Author(s):  
J. Yu ◽  
W. Chen ◽  
P. Wu ◽  
Y. Li
2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (12) ◽  
pp. 2067-2073 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riccardo Autorino ◽  
Claudio Borges ◽  
Michael A. White ◽  
Fatih Altunrende ◽  
Sisto Perdoná ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (9) ◽  
pp. 1937-1945 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen E. A. Burns ◽  
Neill K. J. Adhikari ◽  
Michelle Kho ◽  
Maureen O. Meade ◽  
Rakesh V. Patel ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-145
Author(s):  
Adriano Max Moreira Reis ◽  
Albert Figueras

The objective of this study was to analyze the level of evidence regarding the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of over-the-counter (OTC) cough medications registered in Brazil. The National Health Surveillance Agency database was used to identify the drugs. Clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and studies on safety were searched on the Medline baseline, the Cochrane Library and SIETES (System of Essential Information in Therapeutics and Health; database in Spanish). Most drugs (62.5%) were sold as a fixed-dose combination of two or more drugs. Randomized clinical trials were found for only three drugs: bromhexine, dextromethorphan and guaifenesin. No clinical trials were found for fixed-dose combinations. Systematic reviews on Cochrane did not report any evidence in favor of or against the effectiveness of cough drugs. Efficacy is also unclear, especially regarding fixed-dose combinations. The evidence for the efficacy of OTC cough medications available in Brazil is poor due to the lack of quality studies. Pharmacovigilance of OTC cough medications should be encouraged.


2013 ◽  
Vol 93 (11) ◽  
pp. 1456-1466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Gianola ◽  
Monica Gasparini ◽  
Michela Agostini ◽  
Greta Castellini ◽  
Davide Corbetta ◽  
...  

Background Systematic reviews (SRs) have become increasingly important for informing clinical practice; however, little is known about the reporting characteristics and the quality of the SRs relevant to the practice of rehabilitation health professionals. Objective The purpose of this study was to examine the reporting quality of a representative sample of published SRs on rehabilitation, focusing on the descriptive, reporting, and bias-related characteristics. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted by searching MEDLINE for aggregative and configurative SRs indexed in 2011 that focused on rehabilitation as restorative of functional limitations. Two reviewers independently screened and selected the SRs and extracted data using a 38-item data collection form derived from Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The data were analyzed descriptively. Results Eighty-eight SRs published in 59 journals were sampled. The median compliance with the PRISMA items was 17 (63%) out of 27 items (interquartile ratio=13–22 [48%–82%]). Two thirds of the SRs (n=66) focused on interventions for which efficacy is best addressed through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design, and almost all of these SRs included RCTs (63/66 [95%]). More than two thirds of the SRs assessed the quality of primary studies (74/88 [84%]). Twenty-eight reviews (28/88 [32%]) meta-analyzed the results for at least one outcome. One half of the SRs reported positive statistically significant findings (46%), whereas a detrimental result was present only in one review. Conclusions This sample of SRs in the rehabilitation field showed heterogeneous characteristics and a moderate quality of reporting. Poor control of potential source of bias might be improved if more widely agreed-upon evidence-based reporting guidelines will be actively endorsed and adhered to by authors and journals.


Dermatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Vanessa Lin ◽  
Raahi Patel ◽  
Alexis Wirtz ◽  
Deepika Mannem ◽  
Ryan Ottwell ◽  
...  

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Spin – the misrepresentation of a study’s results – has been identified in abstracts of studies focused on a variety of disorders from multiple fields of medicine. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> This study’s primary objective was to evaluate the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses focused on the treatment of atopic dermatitis for the nine most severe forms of spin. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We systematically searched Embase and MEDLINE for systematic reviews of atopic dermatitis therapies. Screening and data extraction occurred in a masked, duplicate fashion. Each included study was evaluated for the nine most severe types of spin and other study characteristics. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Our searches retrieved 2,456 studies, of which 113 were included for data extraction. Spin was found in 74.3% of our included studies (84/113). Spin type 6 occurred most frequently (68/113, 60.2%). Spin types 1, 2, and 9 were not identified. All industry-funded systematic reviews contained spin in their abstract. The presence of spin was not associated with any specific study characteristics, including the methodological quality of the study. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Severe forms of spin were found in the majority of abstracts for systematic reviews of atopic dermatitis treatments. Steps should be taken to prevent spin to improve the quality of reporting in abstracts.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Atsushi Nakajima ◽  
Ayako Shoji ◽  
Kinya Kokubo ◽  
Ataru Igarashi

Background. In the 2010s, medications with new mechanisms were introduced in Japan for the treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC). A few systematic reviews have compared medications’ relative efficacy, but the reviews included studies on patients from various races, even though the mechanism of CIC is considered to differ between races. The aim of this study was to use a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare the relative efficacy of these medications in Japanese patients. Methods. We conducted a meta-analysis and report it here according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). We identified studies by searching MEDLINE (via the PubMed interface) and the Cochrane Library and ICHUSHI databases and included randomized clinical trials that compared medications for CIC with placebo in Japanese adults. Two reviewers independently screened and assessed articles, abstracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We pooled data by random-effects meta-analyses and also performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to indirectly compare data. Results. The present systematic review and meta-analyses included 1460 patients in 6 randomized clinical trials: 2 on linaclotide, 3 on elobixibat, 2 on lubiprostone, and 1 on lactulose. The results of direct comparisons showed that linaclotide, elobixibat, and lubiprostone were superior to placebo in the change of spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) within 1 week: linaclotide, 1.95 (95% CI, 1.51-2.39); elobixibat, 5.69 (95% CI, 3.31-8.07); and lubiprostone, 2.41 (95% CI, 0.82-4.01). The Bayesian network meta-analysis showed consistent results. Elobixibat 10 mg was ranked first for the increase in SBMs and complete SBMs within 1 week and the time to first SBM. Lubiprostone 48 μg was ranked first for the proportion of patients with SBM within 24 hours. Conclusion. Our direct and indirect meta-analyses revealed that the new CIC medications available in Japan have equal efficacy but that elobixibat and lubiprostone are highly likely to be more efficacious.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document