Suppr超能文献

大规模生产关于 COVID-19 的系统评价:PROSPERO 记录分析。

The mass production of systematic reviews about COVID-19: An analysis of PROSPERO records.

机构信息

Graduate Program in Dentistry, Meriodional College/IMED, Passo Fundo, Brazil.

Graduate Program in Dentistry, Federal University of Pelotas (UFPEL), Pelotas, RS, Brazil.

出版信息

J Evid Based Med. 2021 Feb;14(1):56-64. doi: 10.1111/jebm.12426. Epub 2021 Feb 17.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the characteristics of different designs of systematic reviews (SRs) registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) about COVID-19.

METHODS

The search was performed in the PROSPERO database using the strategy proposed by the database and considered only human studies. The last date of the search was April 27, 2020. Full text of all records was accessed, and data were extracted by a single researcher, which was further double-checked by another researcher. A descriptive analysis was performed considering record characteristics using tables.

RESULTS

We included 564 records from which the vast majority were registered as SRs (n = 513, 91%). In general, we found poor reporting and missing or confusing information, since 84% of the records (n = 474) did not report the full search that would be adopted, 16% (n = 90) did not report clearly the databases that would be used, and 49.1% (n = 277) did not report the number of primary outcomes. The main focus of most of the records involved clinical, epidemiological, complication, and laboratory characteristics (n = 173, 30.7%) or the treatment of COVID-19 (n = 138, 24.5%).

CONCLUSION

A large number of SRs about COVID-19 have been conducted, and many of the assessed records were poorly reported and would be difficult to replicate. Besides, collected data points to an epidemic of redundant reviews on COVID-19.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(PROSPERO)中 COVID-19 相关系统评价(SR)不同设计的特征。

方法

采用 PROSPERO 数据库提出的策略在数据库中进行检索,仅考虑人类研究。检索的最后日期为 2020 年 4 月 27 日。查阅了所有记录的全文,并由一名研究人员提取数据,另一名研究人员进一步进行了双重检查。使用表格对记录特征进行描述性分析。

结果

我们纳入了 564 条记录,其中绝大多数为 SR(n=513,91%)。总体而言,我们发现报告质量较差,存在缺失或混淆的信息,因为 84%(n=474)的记录未报告将采用的完整检索,16%(n=90)未清楚报告将使用的数据库,49.1%(n=277)未报告主要结局的数量。大多数记录的主要关注点是临床、流行病学、并发症和实验室特征(n=173,30.7%)或 COVID-19 的治疗(n=138,24.5%)。

结论

针对 COVID-19 开展了大量的 SR,但许多评估记录的报告质量较差,难以复制。此外,收集的数据表明 COVID-19 存在大量冗余的综述。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

2
The importance of meta-research in dentistry.牙科中荟萃研究的重要性。
Evid Based Dent. 2023 Sep;24(3):98-99. doi: 10.1038/s41432-023-00880-w.
7
Reporting quality of scoping reviews in dental public health.口腔公共卫生范围综述报告质量。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2023 Feb 27;23(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s12874-023-01863-2.
9
Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19.新型冠状病毒肺炎(COVID-19)的活体系统评价特征
Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Aug 4;14:925-935. doi: 10.2147/CLEP.S367339. eCollection 2022.

本文引用的文献

1
PROTOCOL: When and how to replicate systematic reviews.方案:何时以及如何复制系统评价。
Campbell Syst Rev. 2020 May 28;16(2):e1087. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1087. eCollection 2020 Jun.
3
Dexamethasone for COVID-19? Not so fast.地塞米松治疗 COVID-19?先别急。
J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2020;34(3):1241-1243. doi: 10.23812/20-EDITORIAL_1-5.
8
Waste in covid-19 research.新冠疫情研究中的浪费现象。
BMJ. 2020 May 12;369:m1847. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m1847.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验