Reporting and methodological qualities of published surgical meta-analyses

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 70, Issue , 2016, Pages 4-16

  Zhang, Han ^a   Han, Jun ^a   Zhu, Ying Bo ^b   Lau, Wan Yee ^a,c   Schwartz, Myron E ^d   Xie, Guo Qiang ^a   Dai, Shu Yang ^a   Shen, Yi Nan ^a   Wu, Meng Chao ^a   Shen, Feng ^a   Yang, Tian ^a,d  

^a SECOND MILITARY MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b TONGJI UNIVERSITY   (China)

^c and Hong Kong Branch of CAS Center for Excellence in Animal Evolution and Genetics   (Hong Kong)

^d MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

AMSTAR; Meta analysis; Methodologic quality; PRISMA; Reporting quality; Surgery

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ASIA; AUTHOR; CHECKLIST; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; REGISTRATION; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SURGERY; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION;

HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH DESIGN; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, OPERATIVE;

EID: 84957434330     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.06.009     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. M.H. Murad, V.M. Montori, J.P. Ioannidis, R. Jaeschke, P.J. Devereaux, K. Prasad, and et al. How to read a systematic review and meta-analysis and apply the results to patient care: users' guides to the medical literature JAMA 312 2014 171 179
2. J.A. Berlin, and R.M. Golub Meta-analysis as evidence: building a better pyramid JAMA 312 2014 603 605
3. G.H. Guyatt, D.L. Sackett, J.C. Sinclair, R. Hayward, D.J. Cook, and R.J. Cook Users' guides to the medical literature. IX. A method for grading health care recommendations. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group JAMA 274 1995 1800 1804
4. D.J. Cook, C.D. Mulrow, and R.B. Haynes Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions Ann Intern Med 126 1997 376 380
5. H.S. Sacks, J. Berrier, D. Reitman, V.A. Ancona-Berk, and T.C. Chalmers Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials N Engl J Med 316 1987 450 455
6. O.A. Uthman, C.I. Okwundu, C.S. Wiysonge, T. Young, and A. Clarke Citation classics in systematic reviews and meta-analyses: who wrote the top 100 most cited articles PLoS One 8 2013 e78517
7. A.R. Jadad, D.J. Cook, and G.P. Browman A guide to interpreting discordant systematic reviews CMAJ 156 1997 1411 1416
8. J.C. Bailar 3rd The promise and problems of meta-analysis N Engl J Med 337 1997 559 561
9. D. Moher, D.J. Cook, S. Eastwood, I. Olkin, D. Rennie, and D.F. Stroup Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of reporting of meta-analyses Lancet 354 1999 1896 1900
10. A. Liberati, D.G. Altman, J. Tetzlaff, C. Mulrow, P.C. Gøtzsche, J.P. Ioannidis, and et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration Ann Intern Med 151 2009 W65 W94
11. P. Juni, and M. Egger PRISMAtic reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses Lancet 374 2009 1221 1223
12. B.J. Shea, C. Hamel, G.A. Wells, L.M. Bouter, E. Kristjansson, J. Grimshaw, and et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews J Clin Epidemiol 62 2009 1013 1020
13. J.J. Chafen, S.J. Newberry, M.A. Riedl, D.M. Bravata, M. Maglione, M.J. Suttorp, and et al. Diagnosing and managing common food allergies: a systematic review JAMA 303 2010 1848 1856
14. B.J. Shea, L.M. Bouter, J. Peterson, M. Boers, N. Andersson, Z. Ortiz, and et al. External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) PLoS One 2 2007 e1350
15. B.J. Shea, J.M. Grimshaw, G.A. Wells, M. Boers, N. Andersson, C. Hamel, and et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews BMC Med Res Methodol 7 2007 10
16. D. Moher, B. Pham, A. Jones, D.J. Cook, A.R. Jadad, M. Moher, and et al. Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses Lancet 352 1998 609 613
17. L. McAuley, B. Pham, P. Tugwell, and D. Moher Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses Lancet 356 2000 1228 1231
18. L.H. Braga, J. Pemberton, J. Demaria, and A.J. Lorenzo Methodological concerns and quality appraisal of contemporary systematic reviews and meta-analyses in pediatric urology J Urol 186 2011 266 271
19. A. Delaney, S.M. Bagshaw, A. Ferland, B. Manns, K.B. Laupland, and C.J. Doig A systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in the critical care literature Crit Care 9 2005 R575 R582
20. A.S. Tunis, M.D. McInnes, R. Hanna, and K. Esmail Association of study quality with completeness of reporting: have completeness of reporting and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in major radiology journals changed since publication of the PRISMA statement Radiology 269 2013 413 426
21. E. Dixon, M. Hameed, F. Sutherland, D.J. Cook, and C. Doig Evaluating meta-analyses in the general surgical literature: a critical appraisal Ann Surg 241 2005 450 459
22. S. Sauerland, and C.M. Seiler Role of systematic reviews and meta-analysis in evidence-based medicine World J Surg 29 2005 582 587
23. K.G. Shojania, and L.A. Bero Taking advantage of the explosion of systematic reviews: an efficient MEDLINE search strategy Eff Clin Pract 4 2001 157 162
24. C. Anello, and J.L. Fleiss Exploratory or analytic meta-analysis: should we distinguish between them J Clin Epidemiol 48 1995 109 116 discussion 117-8
25. A.R. Jadad, D.J. Cook, A. Jones, T.P. Klassen, P. Tugwell, M. Moher, and et al. Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals JAMA 280 1998 278 280
26. SCImago. SJR - SCImago Journal & Country Rank. Available at http://www.scimagojr.com. Accessed June 30, 2015.
27. A. Booth, M. Clarke, D. Ghersi, D. Moher, M. Petticrew, and L. Stewart An international registry of systematic-review protocols Lancet 377 2011 108 109
28. J.P. Ioannidis, C.Q. Chang, T.K. Lam, S.D. Schully, and M.J. Khoury The geometric increase in meta-analyses from China in the genomic era PLoS One 8 2013 e65602
29. Z. Junhua, S. Hongcai, G. Xiumei, Z. Boli, X. Yaozu, C. Hongbo, and et al. Methodology and reporting quality of systematic review/meta-analysis of traditional Chinese medicine J Altern Complement Med 13 2007 797 805
30. K. Knobloch, A. Gohritz, and P.M. Vogt CONSORT and QUOROM statements revisited: standards of reporting of randomized controlled trials in general surgery Ann Surg 248 2008 1106 1107 discussion 1107-8
31. G. Hannink, H.G. Gooszen, and M.M. Rovers Comparison of registered and published primary outcomes in randomized clinical trials of surgical interventions Ann Surg 257 2013 818 823
32. L.L. Kjaergard, J. Villumsen, and C. Gluud Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses Ann Intern Med 135 2001 982 989