Quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in pediatric surgery


Salim, Adeline, Mullassery, Dhanya and Losty, Paul D ORCID: 0000-0003-0841-5879 (2017) Quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in pediatric surgery. JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 52 (11). pp. 1732-1735.

[img] Text
SR quality - reviewed- JPS-250717.docx - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (45kB)
[img] Text
Figure 1n - Selection of articles included in this review.docx - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (28kB)
[img] Text
Figure 2n - Number of SRsMAs published in recent years.docx - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (14kB)
[img] Text
Figure 3n - Randomisation of studies included in the SRsMAs.docx - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (15kB)
[img] Text
Figure 4n - Quality of SRsMAs as defined using AMSTAR tool.docx - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (15kB)
[img] Text
Figure 5n - Quality of SRsMAs.docx - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (15kB)
[img] Text
Figure 6n- Funnel plot of AMSTAR scores and Impact factor of publishing journals.docx - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (718kB)
[img] Text
Appendix 1 - AMSTAR criteria.docx - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (118kB)
[img] Text
Appendix 2 - List of included studies.docx - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (139kB)
[img] Text
Appendix 3 - List of excluded studies.docx - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (122kB)

Abstract

<h4>Aims</h4>Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) studies may influence and direct surgical practice. Against this background we have analyzed the quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in the specialty field of pediatric surgery using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 11-item tool (AMSTAR).<h4>Methods</h4>MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and the three major journals in pediatric surgery were searched for SRs and MAs in pediatric surgery. Studies involving predominantly adult populations were excluded. Two reviewers independently scored included studies against AMSTAR criteria and disagreements were resolved by consensus. A total rating of 4 or less was considered 'poor' methodological quality, 5-8 as 'fair to good' and 9 or greater as 'good'.<h4>Results</h4>Original searching retrieved 1,281 articles. 126 articles were included for final analysis. Examining recent trends, 4 studies were published in 1995-2000 compared to 78 in 2011-2014. Using AMSTAR scoring criteria, 35 reviews (28%) were regarded as 'poor' in terms of methodological quality, 59 (47%) 'fair', and 32 (25%) 'good' quality. We observed no improvement in AMSTAR score before and after the development of the tool (mean score pre-2008 6.8, post-2008 5.9, p = 0.136).<h4>Conclusions</h4>Despite an increase in the number of SRs / MAs published in pediatric surgery, a quarter of all studies were considered poor in terms of their quality and scientific validity. Journals must define and apply minimum criteria to ensure pediatric surgeons seeking to publish high quality SRs / MAs achieve these requirements.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: Systematic review, Pediatric surgery, Amstar, Quality, Outcomes
Depositing User: Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited: 17 Jan 2018 14:55
Last Modified: 19 Jan 2023 06:43
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2017.07.022
Related URLs:
URI: https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3016226
Dimensions
Altmetric
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)