Journal of Society of Preventive Korean Medicine (대한예방한의학회지)

Society of Preventive Korean Medicine (대한예방한의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Methodological and Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews Published in Journal of Society of Preventive Korean Medicine

대한예방한의학회지에 게재된 체계적 문헌고찰의 방법론 및 보고 질에 대한 평가

  • Song, Eunhye (Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Korean Medicine, Daejeon University) ;
  • Jun, Jihee (Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Korean Medicine, Daejeon University) ;
  • Lee, Myeong Soo (Clinical Medicine Division, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine) ;
  • Ang, Lin (Clinical Medicine Division, Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Kyeong Han (Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Korean Medicine, Woosuk University) ;
  • Park, Sunju (Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Korean Medicine, Daejeon University)
  • 송은혜 (대전대학교 한의과대학 예방의학교실) ;
  • 전지희 (대전대학교 한의과대학 예방의학교실) ;
  • 이명수 (한국한의학연구원 임상의학부) ;
  • ;
  • 김경한 (우석대학교 한의과대학 예방의학교실) ;
  • 박선주 (대전대학교 한의과대학 예방의학교실)
  • Received : 2019.07.27
  • Accepted : 2019.08.14
  • Published : 2019.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives : The publication of systematic reviews (SRs) has increased significantly over the years, and systematic reviews are considered to have the strongest evidence as they are at the top of the hierarchy of evidence pyramid. In this study, a thorough assessment of all SRs published in Journal of Society of Preventive Korean Medicine (JSPKM) was performed to evaluate their reporting quality and methodological quality to better improve the quality of SRs in JSPKM. Methods : JSPKM website was searched to include all SRs published in JSPKM from 1997 to 2018. Two independent researchers assessed the SRs using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR, formerly known as Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews) tool checklist for methodological quality assessment, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline checklist for reporting quality assessment. Results : Out of 618 published articles published in JSPKM from 1997 to 2018, only 3 SRs were identified as SRs. For AMSTAR methodological quality scoring, the average score of 3 SRs was 3.0 out of 11 which is low quality level. For PRISMA reporting quality items, the 3 SRs reported 17.3 items on average out of 27 items. The 3 identified SRs did not provide information on protocol or registration which is included in both AMSTAR assessment tool and PRISMA guideline. Conclusions : Improvements on reporting quality and methodological quality of SRs using relevant tools or guidelines are needed to assure the quality of SRs published in JSPKM so that their conclusions will be more transparent and reliable for decision-making in healthcare and the best clinical practice.

Keywords

References

  1. Higgins JPT, Green, S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. Available from: www.handbook.cochrane.org. Accessed June 3, 2019.
  2. Murad MH, Asi N, Alsawas M, Alahdab F. New evidence pyramid. Evidence Based Medicine 2016;21(4):125. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110401
  3. Pussegoda K, Turner L, Garritty C, Mayhew A, Skidmore B, Stevens A, et al. Systematic review adherence to methodological or reporting quality. Systematic Reviews 2017;6(1):131. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0527-2
  4. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007;7(1):10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-7-10
  5. Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, Bouter LM, Kristjansson E, Grimshaw J, et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2009;62(10):1013-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009
  6. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PG. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLOS Medicine 2009;6(7):e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
  7. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. The Lancet 1999;354(9193):1896-900. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04149-5
  8. PubMed. US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. Available from: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/. Accessed July 15, 2019.
  9. Shin WJ. An Introduction of the Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Hanyang Medical Reviews 2015;35:9. https://doi.org/10.7599/hmr.2015.35.1.9
  10. Kim Y-YH, Hye Sun. A Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of Oriental Medicine in South Korea. Journal of Digital Convergence 2015;13(10):11.
  11. Lee MS, Kang JW, Ernst E. Does moxibustion work? An overview of systematic reviews. BMC Research Notes 2010;3(1):284. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-3-284
  12. Kang H-S, Jeong D, Kim D-I, Lee MS. The use of acupuncture for managing gynaecologic conditions: An overview of systematic reviews. Maturitas 2011;68(4):346-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2011.02.001
  13. Lee MS, Kim JI, Ernst E. Is cupping an effective treatment? An overview of systematic reviews. Journal of acupuncture and meridian studies 2011;4(1):1-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2005-2901(11)60001-0
  14. Lee MS, Oh B, Ernst E. Qigong for healthcare: an overview of systematic reviews. JRSM short reports 2011;2(2):7. https://doi.org/10.1258/shorts.2010.010091
  15. Lee MS, Ernst E. Systematic reviews of t'ai chi: an overview. British journal of sports medicine 2012;46(10):713-8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2010.080622
  16. Lee MS, Ernst E. Acupuncture for surgical conditions: an overview of systematic reviews. International journal of clinical practice 2014;68(6):783-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12372
  17. Luo J, Xu H, Yang G, Qiu Y, Liu J, Chen K. Oral Chinese proprietary medicine for angina pectoris: an overview of systematic reviews /meta-analyses. Complementary therapies in medicine 2014;22(4):787-800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2014.05.011
  18. Xinke Z, Yingdong L, Mingxia F, Kai L, Kaibing C, Yuqing L, et al. Chinese herbal medicine for the treatment of primary hypertension: a methodology overview of systematic reviews. Syst Rev 2016;5(1):180. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0353-y
  19. Zhang X, Liu XT, Kang DY. Traditional Chinese Patent Medicine for Acute Ischemic Stroke: An Overview of Systematic Reviews Based on the GRADE Approach. Medicine 2016;95(12):e2986. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002986
  20. Lee B, Kwon C-Y, Chang GT. Oriental Herbal Medicine for Neurological Disorders in Children: An Overview of Systematic Reviews. The American Journal of Chinese Medicine 2018;46(08):1701-26. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0192415X18500866
  21. Kim TH, Kang JW. Herbal Medicine for Vascular Dementia: an Overview of Systematic Reviews. Current vascular pharmacology 2019.
  22. Sasaki Y, Cheon C, Motoo Y, Jang S, Park S, Ko SG, et al. [Complementary and Alternative Medicine for Breast Cancer Patients: An Overview of Systematic Reviews]. Yakugaku zasshi : Journal of the Pharmaceutical Society of Japan 2019;139(7):1027-46. https://doi.org/10.1248/yakushi.18-00215
  23. Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ (Clinical research ed) 2017;358:9.
  24. An N, Ge L, Liu Y, Xu J, Liang L, Ma J, et al., editors. A PRISMA assessment of the reporting quality of systematic reviews or meta-analysis of interventions on diabetic nephropathy. Abstracts of the 21st Cochrane Colloquium; 2013; Quebec City, Canada: John Wiley & Sons.
  25. Min H, Ryu J, Yun Y. Changes in the Attitudes of Doctors toward Cooperative Practices between Western Medicine and Traditional Korean Medicine: A Systematic Review in Korean Literature. Korean Journal of Oriental Preventive Medical Society 2012;16(1): 15-29.
  26. Kim S, Moon S, Kim B, Yun Y. Systematic Review of Changes in the Perception and Attitude of Medical Doctors toward Traditional Korean Medicine. Korean Journal of Oriental Preventive Medical Society 2013;17 (3):31-46.
  27. Park YL, Jang S, Sung HK, Kweon SU, Sung JW, Yang J, et al. A Systematic Review on clinical studies of Korean medicine for smoking cessation - Focusing on study design. Journal of Society of Preventive Korean Medicine 2015;19(3):115-29.
  28. AMSTAR Team. AMSTAR - a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews, ; Accessed April 2, 2019.
  29. Booth A, Clarke M, Dooley G, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, et al. The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews. Systematic reviews 2012;1:2-2. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-2
  30. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. PROSPERO- International prospective register of systematic reviews, .
  31. Liu Y, Zhang R, Huang J, Zhao X, Liu D, Sun W, et al. Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses of Acupuncture. PLOS ONE 2014;9(11):e113172. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0113172
  32. Kim Y-Y, Hyun HS. A Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of Oriental Medicine in South Korea. Journal of Digital Convergence 2015;13(10):549-59. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2015.13.10.549
  33. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. York, UK: University of York; 2009. Available from: https://www.york.ac.uk/crd/guidance/. Accessed August 6, 2019.
  34. Delgado-Rodriguez M, Sillero-Arenas M. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicina Intensiva (English Edition) 2018;42(7):444-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medine.2017.10.012
  35. Griffiths PG, Taylor RH, Henderson LM, Barrett BT. Letter to the Editor concerning "A systematic review of controlled trials on visual stress using intuitive overlays or colorimeter". J Optom 2017;10(3):199-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2016.11.004

Cited by

  1. 대한한방소아과학회지에 게재된 체계적 문헌고찰의 보고 질 및 방법론적 질 평가 vol.34, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.7778/jpkm.2020.34.1.26