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
Number of systematic reviews included 238
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.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? N/A
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes