Reproducibility of search strategies is poor in systematic reviews published in high-impact pediatrics, cardiology and surgery journals: A cross-sectional study

PLoS ONE

Volumn 11, Issue 9, 2016, Pages

  Koffel, Jonathan B ^a   Rethlefsen, Melissa L ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AWARENESS; CARDIOLOGY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DATA BASE; EDITOR; HUMAN; LIBRARIAN; PEDIATRICS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SURGERY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 84992187641     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0163309     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009; 6(7):e1000100. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 PMID: 19621070
2. Peters JPM, Hooft L, Grolman W, Stegeman I. Reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of otorhinolaryngologic articles based on the PRISMA Statement. PLoS One. 2015; 10(8): e0136540-e. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136540 PMID: 26317406
3. Fleming PS, Koletsi D, Seehra J, Pandis N. Systematic reviews published in higher impact clinical journals were of higher quality. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014; 67(7):754-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.01.002 PMID: 24709031
4. Fleming PS, Seehr J, Polychronopoulou A, Fedorowicz Z, Pandis N. A PRISMA assessment of the reporting quality of systematic reviews in orthodontics. Angle Orthod. 2013; 83(1):158-63. doi: 10.2319/032612-251.1 PMID: 22720835
5. Zhang Z-w, Cheng J, Liu Z, Ma J-c, Li J-l, Wang J. Epidemiology, quality and reporting characteristics of meta-analyses of observational studies published in Chinese journals. BMJ Open. 2015; 5: e008066. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008066 PMID: 26644119
6. Zhang J, Wang J, Han L, Zhang F, Cao J, Ma Y. Epidemiology, quality, and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of nursing interventions published in Chinese journals. Nurs Outlook. 2015; 63(4):446-55. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2014.11.020 PMID: 26187084
7. Adie S, Ma D, Harris Ia, Naylor JM, Craig JC. Quality of conduct and reporting of meta-analyses of surgical interventions. Ann Surg. 2015; 261(4):685-94. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000836 PMID: 25575252
8. Zorzela L, Golder S, Liu Y. Quality of reporting in systematic reviews of adverse events: systematic review. BMJ. 2014; 348:f7668. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f7668 PMID: 24401468
9. Papageorgiou SN, Papadopoulos MA, Athanasiou AE. Reporting characteristics of meta-analyses in orthodontics: methodological assessment and statistical recommendations. Eur J Orthod. 2014; 36 (1):74-85. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjt008 PMID: 23493385
10. Kowalczuk M, Adamich J, Simunovic N, Farrokhyar F, Ayeni OR. Methodological quality of systematic reviews addressing femoroacetabular impingement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014; 23 (9):2583-9. doi: 10.1007/s00167-014-3151-x PMID: 25037984
11. Klimo P Jr, Thompson CJ, Ragel BT, Boop FA. Methodology and reporting of meta-analyses in the neurosurgical literature. J Neurosurg. 2014; 120(4):796-810. doi: 10.3171/2013.11.JNS13195 PMID: 24460488
12. Hutton B, Salanti G, Chaimani A, Caldwell DM, Schmid C, Thorlund K, et al. The quality of reporting methods and results in network meta-analyses: an overview of reviews and suggestions for improvement. PLoS One. 2014; 9(3):e92508-e. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092508 PMID: 24671099
13. Ge L, Wang JC, Li JL, Liang L, An N, Shi XT, et al. The assessment of the quality of reporting of systematic reviews/meta-analyses in diagnostic tests published by authors in China. PLoS One. 2014; 9 (1):e85908. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085908 PMID: 24465781
14. Turner L, Galipeau J, Garritty C, Manheimer E, Wieland LS, Yazdi F, et al. An evaluation of epidemiological and reporting characteristics of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) systematic reviews (SRs). PLoS One. 2013; 8(1):e53536. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053536 PMID: 23341949
15. Gianola S, Gasparini M, Agostini M, Castellini G, Corbetta D, Gozzer P, et al. Survey of the reporting characteristics of systematic reviews in rehabilitation. Phys Ther. 2013; 93(11):1456-66. doi: 10.2522/ ptj.20120382 PMID: 23744458
16. Gagnier JJ, Kellam PJ. Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in the orthopaedic literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013; 95(11):e771-7. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00597 PMID: 23780547
17. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009; 62(10):1006-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005 PMID: 19631508
18. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000; 283(15):2008-12. PMID: 10789670
19. PRISMA. PRISMA Endorsers 2016 [cited 22 August, 2016]. Available from: http://prisma-statement. org/Endorsement/PRISMAEndorsers.aspx.
20. Rice DB, Shrier I, Kloda LA, Benedetti A, Thombs BD. Methodological quality of meta-analyses of the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools. J Psychosom Res. 2016; 84:84-92. doi: 10.1016/j. jpsychores.2016.03.013 PMID: 27095164
21. Tunis AS, McInnes MDF, Hanna R, Esmail K. 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. 2013; 269 (2):413-26. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13130273 PMID: 23824992
22. Stevens A, Shamseer L, Weinstein E, Thielman J, Altman DG, Hirst A, et al. Relation of completeness of reporting of health research to journals' endorsement of reporting guidelines: systematic review. BMJ. 2014; 348:g3804. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g3804 PMID: 24965222
23. Panic N, Leoncini E, de Belvis G, Ricciardi W, Boccia S. Evaluation of the endorsement of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement on the quality of published systematic review and meta-analyses. PLoS One. 2013; 8(12):e83138. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0083138 PMID: 24386151
24. Higgins J, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
25. Relevo R, Balshern H. Finding Evidence for Comparing Medical Interventions. Methods guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews, AHRQ publication No 10(14)-EHC063-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; January 2014. Chapters available at: http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov.
26. Institute of Medicine Committee on Standards for Systematic Reviews of Comparative Effectiveness Research. Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. Eden J, Levit L, Berg A, Morton S, editors. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011.
27. Mullins MM, DeLuca JB, Crepaz N, Lyles CM. Reporting quality of search methods in systematic reviews of HIV behavioral interventions (2000-2010): are the searches clearly explained, systematic and reproducible? Research Synthesis Methods. 2014; 5(2):116-30. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1098 PMID: 26052651
28. Rethlefsen ML, Farrell AM, Osterhaus Trzasko LC, Brigham TJ. Librarian co-authors correlated with higher quality reported search strategies in general internal medicine systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015; 68(6):617-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.025 PMID: 25766056
29. Sampson M, McGowan J, Tetzlaff J, Cogo E, Moher D. No consensus exists on search reporting methods for systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008; 61(8):748-54. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.10.009 PMID: 18586178
30. Golder S, Loke Y, McIntosh HM. Poor reporting and inadequate searches were apparent in systematic reviews of adverse effects. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008; 61(5):440-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.06.005 PMID: 18394536
31. Koffel JB. Use of recommended search strategies in systematic reviews and the impact of librarian involvement: a cross-sectional survey of recent authors. PLoS One. 2015; 10(5):e0125931. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125931 PMID: 25938454
32. Maggio LA, Tannery NH, Kanter SL. Reproducibility of literature search reporting in medical education reviews. Acad Med. 2011; 86(8):1049-54. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31822221e7 PMID: 21694568
33. Yoshii A, Plaut DA, McGraw KA, Anderson MJ, Wellik KE. Analysis of the reporting of search strategies in Cochrane systematic reviews. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009; 97(1):21-9. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.97.1. 004 PMID: 19158999
34. Fleming PS, Koletsi D, Pandis N. Blinded by PRISMA: are systematic reviewers focusing on PRISMA and ignoring other guidelines? PLoS One. 2014; 9(5):e96407-e. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0096407 PMID: 24788774
35. Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Sampson M, Tricco AC, et al. Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study. PLoS Med. 2016; 13(5):e1002028. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002028 PMID: 27218655
36. Journal Citation Reports [Internet]. 2012 [cited May 11, 2016]. Available from: http://thomsonreuters. com/journal-citation-reports/.
37. Internet Archive. Wayback Machine [cited 2016 April 27]. Available from: https://archive.org/web/.
38. Montori VM, Wilczynski NL, Morgan D, Haynes RB, Hedges T. Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ. 2005; 330(7482):68. PMID: 15619601
39. Sampson M, McGowan J. Errors in search strategies were identified by type and frequency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006; 59(10):1057-63. PMID: 16980145
40. Walter CJ, Dumville JC, Sharp CA, Page T. Systematic review and meta-analysis of wound dressings in the prevention of surgical-site infections in surgical wounds healing by primary intention. Br J Surg. 2012; 99(9):1185-94. doi: 10.1002/bjs.8812 PMID: 22777875
41. La Mantia L, Vacchi L, Rovaris M, Di Pietrantonj C, Ebers G, Fredrikson S, et al. Interferon beta for secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: a systematic review. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2013; 84 (4):420-6. doi: 10.1136/jnnp-2012-303291 PMID: 22952326