Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of the Bariatric Surgery for Diabetes Mellitus

Ref ID 116
First Author X. Jin
Journal JOURNAL OF DIABETES RESEARCH
Year Of Publishing 2019
URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2019/9541638
Keywords • Surgery
• Transparency
• Disclosure
• Protocols
• Grey literature
• Publication bias
Problem(s) • Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing
• No registered or published protocol
• Grey literature excluded
• Poor consideration of publication bias
• Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed
• Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
• Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country China
Checklists • AMSTAR 1
Aim To assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR) that assessed the efficacy of bariatric surgery in diabetic patients across 8 databases from inception up to Dec 2019.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings The average AMSTAR score in the included 64 systematic reviews was 7:4 ± 1.7. Study protocols not being registered, grey literature not retrieved, incorporation of grey literature as exclusion criteria, and failure to evaluate publication bias and report a conflict of interest were the main causes of low AMSTAR scores.
Number of systematic reviews included 64
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 2684
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description