Methodological quality and reporting quality of COVID-19 living systematic review: a cross-sectional study

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Research

Lingli Zhang¹  Hailong Li¹  Linan Zeng¹  Mengting Yang²  Zheng Liu²  Siyi He³  Zhe Chen³  Jiefeng Luo³  Dan Liu³  Xue Xiao⁴ 

[1] Department of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research On Drug Products In Vitro and In Vivo Correlation, Chengdu, China;Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Ministry of Education, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;Department of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research On Drug Products In Vitro and In Vivo Correlation, Chengdu, China;Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Ministry of Education, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;Department of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;NMPA Key Laboratory for Technical Research On Drug Products In Vitro and In Vivo Correlation, Chengdu, China;Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Ministry of Education, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;West China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Ministry of Education, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China;

关键词: Living systematic review;    Coronavirus disease 2019;    Systematic review;    Methodological quality;    Reporting quality;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12874-023-01980-y

 received in 2022-11-16, accepted in 2023-06-18,  发布年份 2023

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

ObjectivesThe main objective of this study is to evaluate the methodological quality and reporting quality of living systematic reviews (LSRs) on Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), while the secondary objective is to investigate potential factors that may influence the overall quality of COVID-19 LSRs. MethodsSix representative databases, including Medline, Excerpta Medica Database (Embase), Cochrane Library, China national knowledge infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, and China Science, Technology Journal Database (VIP) were systematically searched for COVID-19 LSRs. Two authors independently screened articles, extracted data, and then assessed the methodological and reporting quality of COVID-19 LSRs using the "A Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2" (AMSTAR-2) tool and "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses" (PRISMA) 2020 statement, respectively. Univariate linear regression and multivariate linear regression were used to explore eight potential factors that might affect the methodological quality and reporting quality of COVID-19 LSRs.ResultsA total of 64 COVID-19 LSRs were included. The AMSTAR-2 evaluation results revealed that the number of "yes" responses for each COVID-19 LSR was 13 ± 2.68 (mean ± standard deviation). Among them, 21.9% COVID-19 LSRs were rated as "high", 4.7% as "moderate", 23.4% as "low", and 50% as "critically low". The evaluation results of the PRISMA 2020 statement showed that the sections with poor adherence were methods, results and other information. The number of "yes" responses for each COVID-19 LSR was 21 ± 4.18 (mean ± standard deviation). The number of included studies and registration are associated with better methodological quality; the number of included studies and funding are associated with better reporting quality.ConclusionsImprovement is needed in the methodological and reporting quality of COVID-19 LSRs. Researchers conducting COVID-19 LSRs should take note of the quality-related factors identified in this study to generate evidence-based evidence of higher quality.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s) 2023

【 图 表 】

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

13690_2023_1151_Article_IEq17.gif

Fig. 1