Endorsement of PRISMA statement and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in nursing journals: a cross-sectional study
نویسندگان
چکیده
OBJECTIVE Systematic reviews (SRs) often poorly report key information, thereby diminishing their usefulness. Previous studies evaluated published SRs and determined that they failed to meet explicit criteria or characteristics. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was recommended as a reporting guideline for SR and meta-analysis (MA), but previous studies showed that adherence to the statement was not high for SRs published in different medical fields. Thus, the aims of this study are twofold: (1) to investigate the number of nursing journals that have required or recommended the use of the PRISMA statement for reporting SR, and (2) to examine the adherence of SRs and/or meta-analyses to the PRISMA statement published in nursing journals. DESIGN A cross-sectional study. METHODS Nursing journals listed in the ISI journal citation report were divided into 2 groups based on the recommendation of PRISMA statement in their 'Instruction for Authors'. SRs and meta-analyses published in 2014 were searched in 3 databases. 37 SRs and meta-analyses were randomly selected in each group. The adherence of each item to the PRISMA was examined and summarised using descriptive statistics. The quality of the SRs was assessed by Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews. The differences between the 2 groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS Out of 107 nursing journals, 30 (28.0%) recommended or required authors to follow the PRISMA statement when they submit SRs or meta-analyses. The median rates of adherence to the PRISMA statement for reviews published in journals with and without PRISMA endorsement were 64.9% (IQR: 17.6-92.3%) and 73.0% (IQR: 59.5-94.6%), respectively. No significant difference was observed in any of the items between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS The median adherence of SRs and meta-analyses in nursing journals to PRISMA is low at 64.9% and 73.0%, respectively. Nonetheless, the adherence level of nursing journals to the PRISMA statement does not significantly vary whether they endorse or recommend such a guideline.
منابع مشابه
ارزیابی کیفیت گزارش مطالعات مرور نظاممند و فراتحلیل در مجلات پرستاری و مامایی ایران
Background & Aim: In the view of the importance of evidence-based clinical practice in recent years, clinical disciplines such as nursing and midwifery have found a special need to systematic review and meta-analysis. However, systematic reviews and meta-analysises like any other studies may be poorly designed and implemented. Therefore, certain guidelines have been considered for reporting of ...
متن کاملA PRISMA assessment of reporting the quality of published dental systematic reviews in Iran, up to 2017
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Proper scientific reporting is necessary to ensure correct interpretation of study results by readers. Systematic reviews (SRs) are of critical importance in evidence-based dentistry. This study assessed the reporting quality of published dental SRs in Iran.METHODS: The PubMed and ISI electronic databases were searched to collect published Iranian dental SRs up to the end of...
متن کاملEvaluation of the Endorsement of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Statement on the Quality of Published Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses
INTRODUCTION PRISMA statement was published in 2009 in order to set standards in the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of PRISMA endorsement on the quality of reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, published in journals in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology (GH). METHODS Quality of reporting a...
متن کاملپریزما؛ موارد ترجیحی در گزارش مقالات مروری منظم و فراتحلیل
Today, understanding of systematic reviews and meta-analyses and their practical use is essential for who concerned with society's health. Most of the medical reports invoked to these reviews and statements and it is necessary for scientific experts to be familiar with their performing rules and the way of their writing. The basic sciences specialists and clinical professionals study them to ...
متن کاملFactors Involved in Missed Nursing Care: A Systematic Review
Background. Missed Nursing Care (MNC) is experienced in nearly all health care facilities. Awareness of the aspects involved in the occurrence of MNC can lead to the improvement of the quality of patient care. This systematic review aims to answer the question: "What factors are involved in the incidence of missed nursing care?" Methods. This systematic review follows the Preferred Reporting...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره 7 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2017