Suppr超能文献

秘鲁作者主导的系统评价的特征与质量:一项范围综述

Characteristics and quality of systematic reviews led by Peruvian authors: A scoping review.

作者信息

Brañez-Condorena Ana, Soriano-Moreno David R, Mejia Jhonatan R, Chavez-Rimache Lesly, Fernandez-Guzman Daniel, Martinez-Rivera Raisa N, Becerra-Chauca Naysha, Delgado-Flores Carolina J, Taype-Rondan Alvaro

机构信息

EviSalud - Evidencias en Salud, Lima, Peru.

Unidad de Investigación Clínica y Epidemiológica, Escuela de Medicina, Universidad Peruana Unión, Lima, Peru.

出版信息

Heliyon. 2024 Aug 24;10(17):e36887. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36887. eCollection 2024 Sep 15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews (SRs) worldwide suffer from methodological deficiencies, potentially biasing intervention decisions, and Peruvian SRs are no exception. Evaluating SRs led by Peruvian researchers is a crucial step to enhance quality and transparency in decision-making and to identify topics where SRs are either scarce or prioritized for research.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the characteristics and assess the methodological quality of SRs with Peruvian first authors.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review within the Scopus database on January 5, 2023. We aimed to identify published SRs of interventions in which the first author had a Peruvian affiliation, published between 2013 and 2022. We evaluated the methodological quality of these SRs using the AMSTAR 2 tool. We assessed the factors associated with the AMSTAR 2 score using adjusted mean differences (aMD), including their 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI).

RESULTS

We identified 95 eligible SRs, with a clear upward trend. SRs were primarily published in Q1 (43.2 %) and Q2 (23.2 %) journals, predominantly affiliated with institutions in Lima (90.5 %). Areas like infectious diseases (20.0 %) and dentistry (18.9 %) were most frequent. AMSTAR 2 assessments highlighted deficiencies, with few SRs reporting prior protocols (37.9 %), comprehensive search strategies (23.2 %), explanations for excluded studies (20.0 %), adequate descriptions of included studies (38.3 %), or funding sources (19.1 %). Notably, SRs in Q4 journals (aMD: -19.7, 95 % CI: -33.8 to -5.5) and those on surgical interventions (aMD: -22.6, 95 % CI: -34.7 to -10.4) had lower AMSTAR 2 scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Although Peruvian-led SRs are increasingly being published, critical deficiencies are common, especially in reporting protocols, search strategies, study descriptions, and funding sources. Addressing these gaps is pivotal for enhancing the credibility and utility of these SRs in informing decision-making.

摘要

背景

全球范围内的系统评价(SRs)存在方法学缺陷,可能会使干预决策产生偏差,秘鲁的系统评价也不例外。评估由秘鲁研究人员主导的系统评价是提高决策质量和透明度以及确定系统评价稀缺或优先研究主题的关键一步。

目的

描述以秘鲁第一作者发表的系统评价的特征并评估其方法学质量。

方法

2023年1月5日,我们在Scopus数据库中进行了一项范围综述。我们旨在识别2013年至2022年间发表的、第一作者隶属于秘鲁机构的干预性系统评价。我们使用AMSTAR 2工具评估这些系统评价的方法学质量。我们使用调整后的均值差(aMD)评估与AMSTAR 2评分相关的因素,包括其95%置信区间(95%CI)。

结果

我们识别出95篇符合条件的系统评价,呈现出明显的上升趋势。系统评价主要发表在Q1(43.2%)和Q2(23.2%)区的期刊上,主要隶属于利马的机构(90.5%)。传染病(20.0%)和牙科(18.9%)等领域最为常见。AMSTAR 2评估突出了不足之处,很少有系统评价报告预先制定的方案(37.9%)、全面的检索策略(23.2%)、排除研究的解释(20.0%)、纳入研究的充分描述(38.3%)或资金来源(19.1%)。值得注意的是,Q4区期刊发表的系统评价(aMD:-19.7,95%CI:-33.8至-5.5)以及外科干预方面的系统评价(aMD:-22.6,95%CI:-34.7至-10.4)的AMSTAR 2评分较低。

结论

尽管由秘鲁主导的系统评价发表数量日益增加,但关键缺陷普遍存在,尤其是在报告方案、检索策略、研究描述和资金来源方面。弥补这些差距对于提高这些系统评价在为决策提供信息方面的可信度和实用性至关重要。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c008/11403479/b5deb1ecaf7a/gr1.jpg

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