Paras Tyler, Sabzevari Soheil, Solomon David, Smith Clair, McDonough Christine, Lin Albert
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Diego, Medical Center, San Diego, California, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2022 Sep 5;10(9):23259671221121330. doi: 10.1177/23259671221121330. eCollection 2022 Sep.
Popularization of systematic reviews has been met with controversy because of concerns that the primary literature for certain topics may not be suited for systematic review and meta-analysis.
To assess the rate of publication of systematic reviews based on their level of evidence (LOE) in influential orthopaedic sports medicine journals and commonly studied topics in sports medicine.
Systematic review.
An electronic search was performed using the PubMed database of studies published from January 2010 to December 2020. The advanced search function was used to identify systematic reviews from the (), (), , (), (), and (), as well as reviews of the most common areas of sports medicine research, including rotator cuff repair (RCR), shoulder instability (SI), anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), and meniscal repair. The LOE was assigned to each included study according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Studies were grouped as LOE 1-2, LOE 3-5, and nonclinical systematic reviews. A negative binomial regression was used to determine the changes in publication rate over time.
A total of 2162 systematic reviews were included in this study. From 2010 to 2020, the rate of publication of LOE 3-5 systematic reviews increased significantly among most of the surveyed journals (, < .0001; , = .01; , < .0001; , < .0001; , < .0001), with the exception of ( = .57). The rate of publication of LOE 1-2 systematic reviews increased in ( < .0001), ( = .02), ( < .0001), and ( < .0001); however, no significant changes were seen in ( = .08) or ( = .15). The publication rate of LOE 3-5 systematic reviews increased for all sports medicine topics surveyed (meniscal repair, < .0001; RCR, < .0001; SI, < .0001; ACLR, < .0001). However, the publication rate of LOE 1-2 studies only increased for RCR ( = .0003) and ACLR ( < .0001).
The rate of publication of LOE 3-5 systematic reviews exponentially increased in orthopaedic sports medicine journals over the past decade, outpacing the publication rate of LOE 1-2 systematic reviews.
系统评价的普及引发了争议,因为有人担心某些主题的原始文献可能不适合进行系统评价和荟萃分析。
根据有影响力的骨科运动医学期刊中系统评价的证据水平(LOE)以及运动医学中常见的研究主题,评估系统评价的发表率。
系统评价。
使用PubMed数据库对2010年1月至2020年12月发表的研究进行电子检索。利用高级检索功能从()、()、、()、()和()中识别系统评价,以及运动医学研究最常见领域的综述,包括肩袖修复(RCR)、肩关节不稳(SI)、前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)和半月板修复。根据牛津循证医学中心的标准为每项纳入研究指定证据水平。研究分为证据水平1 - 2级、证据水平3 - 5级和非临床系统评价。采用负二项回归确定发表率随时间的变化。
本研究共纳入2162篇系统评价。2010年至2020年期间,在大多数被调查期刊中,证据水平3 - 5级系统评价的发表率显著增加(, <.0001;, =.01;, <.0001;, <.0001;, <.0001),( =.57)除外。证据水平1 - 2级系统评价的发表率在( <.0001)、( =.02)、( <.0001)和( <.0001)中有所增加;然而,( =.08)或( =.15)未见显著变化。所有被调查的运动医学主题中,证据水平3 - 5级系统评价的发表率均有所增加(半月板修复, <.0001;肩袖修复, <.0001;肩关节不稳, <.0001;前交叉韧带重建, <.0001)。然而,证据水平1 - 2级研究的发表率仅在肩袖修复( =.0003)和前交叉韧带重建( <.0001)中有所增加。
在过去十年中,骨科运动医学期刊中证据水平3 - 5级系统评价的发表率呈指数级增长,超过了证据水平1 - 2级系统评价的发表率。