Association Between Prospective Registration and Quality of Systematic Reviews in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-epidemiological Study

Ref ID 796
First Author Q. Zheng
Journal FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE
Year Of Publishing 2021
URL https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.639652/full
Keywords • Protocols
• Low reporting quality
• Non-Cochrane reviews
• Low methodological quality
• Pre-specification
• Endocrinology
Problem(s) • Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review
• No registered or published protocol
• Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
• Low reporting (PRISMA) quality
• Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported
• Poor consideration of publication bias
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Meta-epidemiological analysis
First Author Country China
Checklists • PRISMA 2009
• AMSTAR 2
Aim To assess the methodological (AMSTAR-2) and reporting (PRISMA) quality of systematic reviews in type 2 diabetes mellitus published between 2005 and 2018.
Level of Investigation Analytical
Summary of Findings From 238 included systematic reviews of type 2 diabetes mellitus indexed on PubMed between 2005 and 2018, higher scores were noted for registered reviews, relative to non-registered reviews (AMSTAR-2 mean score: 18.0 vs. 14.5, P = 0.000; PRISMA mean score: 20.4 vs. 17.6, P = 0.000). AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA scores were associated with registration status, country of the first author, and statistical results. The proportion discussing publication bias and reporting funding sources were <40% for both registered and non-registered systematic reviews.
Number of systematic reviews included 238
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 1648
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description