Gundogan Buket, Dowlut Naeem, Rajmohan Shivanchan, Borrelli Mimi R, Millip Mirabel, Iosifidis Christos, Udeaja Yagazie Z, Mathew Ginimol, Fowler Alexander, Agha Riaz
University College London Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom.
JAAD Int. 2020 Sep 7;1(2):157-174. doi: 10.1016/j.jdin.2020.07.007. eCollection 2020 Dec.
Reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses is of critical importance in dermatology because of their key role in informing health care decisions.
To assess the compliance of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in leading dermatology journals with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines.
This review was carried out in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Included studies were reviews published across 6 years in the top 4 highest-impact-factor dermatology journals of 2017. Records and full texts were screened independently. Data analysis was conducted with univariate multivariable linear regression. The primary outcome was to assess the compliance of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in leading dermatology journals with the PRISMA statement.
A total of 166 studies were included and mean PRISMA compliance across all articles was 73%. Compliance significantly improved over time (β = .016; = <.001). The worst reported checklist item was item 5 (reporting on protocol existence), with a compliance of 15% of articles.
PRISMA compliance within leading dermatology journals could be improved; however, it is steadily improving.
由于系统评价和荟萃分析在为医疗保健决策提供信息方面发挥着关键作用，因此其报告质量在皮肤病学中至关重要。
评估主要皮肤病学期刊中系统评价和荟萃分析对系统评价和荟萃分析优先报告项目（PRISMA）声明指南的遵循情况。
本综述按照PRISMA指南进行。纳入的研究为2017年影响因子排名前4的皮肤病学期刊在6年期间发表的综述。记录和全文由独立人员进行筛选。采用单变量多变量线性回归进行数据分析。主要结果是评估主要皮肤病学期刊中系统评价和荟萃分析对PRISMA声明的遵循情况。
共纳入166项研究，所有文章的PRISMA平均遵循率为73%。随着时间的推移，遵循率显著提高（β = 0.016；P < 0.001）。报告最差的清单项目是项目5（报告方案的存在情况），只有15%的文章符合要求。
主要皮肤病学期刊对PRISMA的遵循情况有待改善；不过，情况正在稳步改善。
