AI Article Synopsis
- The study investigates the quality of meta-analyses (MAs) in orthopedics, focusing on improvements since the introduction of PRISMA guidelines and AMSTAR evaluation tools, and examines how factors like country, funding, and author count affect this quality.
- A total of 154 meta-analyses from four high-impact orthopedic journals were assessed, yielding average scores of 20.86/27 for PRISMA and 7.86/11 for AMSTAR, indicating notable variation in quality across journals, with OTSR performing the best and JBJS the worst.
- Results showed significant improvement in the quality of meta-analyses from 2005-2008 to 2012-
Article Abstract
Background: Meta-Analyses are the basis of professional and healthcare agencies recommendations and have a growing importance. Quality of meta-analyses has been investigated in some medical fields but to our best knowledge this issue remains under investigated in orthopedics. Therefore, we performed a systematic analysis to: 1) after the introduction of PRISMA statement as a comprehensive guideline and the use of the AMSTAR tool as the standard for sufficient review methodology, has the quality of MAs improved because of that? 2) have some general characteristics influenced the quality of MAs (country, funding source, number of authors)?
Material And Methods: We systematically searched the meta-analyses in the top four journals with the impact factor (2015) as following: JBJS, Osteoarthritis Cartilage Arthroscopy and Clin Orthop Relat Res from 2005 to 2008 and from 2012 to 2015. Likewise from 2012-2015, we also analyzed the meta-analyses from OTSR. Characteristics were extracted based on the PRISMA statement and the AMSTAR tool. Country, number of authors, funding source were also extracted.
Results: A total of 154 meta-analyses were included in the present study. Score with PRISMA statement and the AMSTAR checklist were 20.86±3.04 out of a maximum of 27 and 7.86±1.55 out of a maximum of 11. The best journal was OTSR according to the PRISMA (23.06±1.92) and AMSTAR (9.13±0.87) scores. And the worst journal was Clin Orthop Relat Res according to the PRISMA score (19.4±2.70) and JBJS according to the AMSTAR score (6.78±1.65). Twelve items showed significant difference in the PRISMA statement, and five items in the AMSTAR checklist. Integral score of PRISMA statement and AMSTAR checklist has a significant difference between 2005-2008 and 2012-2015. The MAs reported from U.S. (56, 36.4%) were more than any other region in the world. And the MAs published by Asia/Oceania increased remarkably between these two period times [from (4, 10.8%) to (45, 38.5%)].
Conclusion: This study showed that methodological reporting quality of meta-analyses in the major orthopedics journals has improved after the publication of the PRISMA statement.
Level Of Evidence: Level III.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2017.08.009 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Basic Science and Pathogenesis.
Alzheimers Dement
December 2024
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Background: Ischemic stroke (IS) is a risk factor for developing Alzheimer's disease (AD). In this context, microglial activation is a shared cellular response to these two conditions that can be either beneficial or detrimental. Previous research has established that mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles (MSC-EVs) treatment leads to enhanced functional recovery and reduced brain infarct volume in animal IS models.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBasic Science and Pathogenesis.
Alzheimers Dement
December 2024
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Background: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by the accumulation of amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques and tau tangles in the brain, and neurotransmission dysfunctions. Indeed, our group recently demonstrated that the γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA)ergic system is vulnerable to AD pathology in humans. However, whether this vulnerability is also present in AD rodent models is still unknown.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAssociations between HEXACO personality traits, substance use disorders, and behavioral addictions: a protocol for a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.
Syst Rev
January 2025
Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Background: While research has explored the connection between addiction and personality, no systematic study has examined how substance use disorders (SUD) and behavioral addictions specifically relate to the HEXACO model of personality. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to fill this gap by investigating the association between HEXACO personality traits and various addictions, including illegal substances (e.g.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFChemotherapy plus immunotherapy as first line combination in older patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Semin Oncol
December 2024
Department of Oncology, University of Turin, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, Orbassano, Torino, Italy.
Background: Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) accounts for 10%-15% of all lung cancers. At diagnosis, nearly two thirds of patients with SCLC have extensive stage (ES), with a median overall survival (OS) less than 12 months. The combination of protein-death-1/protein-death-ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with first-line platinum plus etoposide chemotherapy has changed the therapeutic landscape for ES-SCLC.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEvidence-based approaches to cranial cerebrospinal fluid leaks in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of the literature.
Neurosurg Rev
December 2024
Department of Neurosurgery, Accra Medical Centre, Accra, Ghana.
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks commonly occur due to trauma or surgical procedures. Here we review CSF leak diagnosis and management in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). A systematic review of the CSF leak management in LMICs was conducted using PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase and Web of Science databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!