Cargando…

The state of asthma epidemiology: an overview of systematic reviews and their quality

BACKGROUND: Recently, we have published an overview of systematic reviews in allergy epidemiology and identified asthma as the most commonly reviewed allergic disease. Building on this work, we aimed to investigate the quality of systematic reviews in asthma using the AMSTAR checklist and to provide...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Genuneit, Jon, Seibold, Annina M., Apfelbacher, Christian J., Konstantinou, George N., Koplin, Jennifer J., La Grutta, Stefania, Logan, Kirsty, Flohr, Carsten, Perkin, Michael R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5387188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28400946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13601-017-0146-y
_version_ 1782520893794156544
author Genuneit, Jon
Seibold, Annina M.
Apfelbacher, Christian J.
Konstantinou, George N.
Koplin, Jennifer J.
La Grutta, Stefania
Logan, Kirsty
Flohr, Carsten
Perkin, Michael R.
author_facet Genuneit, Jon
Seibold, Annina M.
Apfelbacher, Christian J.
Konstantinou, George N.
Koplin, Jennifer J.
La Grutta, Stefania
Logan, Kirsty
Flohr, Carsten
Perkin, Michael R.
author_sort Genuneit, Jon
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Recently, we have published an overview of systematic reviews in allergy epidemiology and identified asthma as the most commonly reviewed allergic disease. Building on this work, we aimed to investigate the quality of systematic reviews in asthma using the AMSTAR checklist and to provide a reference for future, more in-depth assessment of the extent of previous knowledge. METHODS: We included all 307 systematic reviews indexed with asthma, including occupational asthma, and/or wheeze from our previous search in PubMed and EMBASE up to December 2014 for systematic reviews on epidemiological research on allergic diseases. Topics of the included systematic reviews were indexed and we applied the AMSTAR checklist for methodological quality to all. Statistical analyses include description of lower and upper bounds of AMSTAR scores and variation across publication time and topics. RESULTS: Of 43 topics catalogued, family history, birth weight, and feeding of formula were only covered once in systematic reviews published from 2011 onwards. Overall, at least one meta-analysis was conducted for all topics except for “social determinants”, “perinatal”, “birth weight”, and “climate”. AMSTAR quality scores were significantly higher in more recently published systematic reviews, in those with meta-analysis, and in Cochrane reviews. There was evidence of variation of quality across topics even, after accounting for these characteristics. Genetic factors in asthma development were often covered by systematic reviews with some evidence of unsubstantiated updates or repetition. CONCLUSIONS: We present a comprehensive overview with an indexed database of published systematic reviews in asthma epidemiology including quality scores. We highlight some topics including active smoking and pets, which should be considered for future systematic reviews. We propose that our search strategy and database could be a basis for topic-specific overviews of systematic reviews in asthma epidemiology. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13601-017-0146-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5387188
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53871882017-04-11 The state of asthma epidemiology: an overview of systematic reviews and their quality Genuneit, Jon Seibold, Annina M. Apfelbacher, Christian J. Konstantinou, George N. Koplin, Jennifer J. La Grutta, Stefania Logan, Kirsty Flohr, Carsten Perkin, Michael R. Clin Transl Allergy Research BACKGROUND: Recently, we have published an overview of systematic reviews in allergy epidemiology and identified asthma as the most commonly reviewed allergic disease. Building on this work, we aimed to investigate the quality of systematic reviews in asthma using the AMSTAR checklist and to provide a reference for future, more in-depth assessment of the extent of previous knowledge. METHODS: We included all 307 systematic reviews indexed with asthma, including occupational asthma, and/or wheeze from our previous search in PubMed and EMBASE up to December 2014 for systematic reviews on epidemiological research on allergic diseases. Topics of the included systematic reviews were indexed and we applied the AMSTAR checklist for methodological quality to all. Statistical analyses include description of lower and upper bounds of AMSTAR scores and variation across publication time and topics. RESULTS: Of 43 topics catalogued, family history, birth weight, and feeding of formula were only covered once in systematic reviews published from 2011 onwards. Overall, at least one meta-analysis was conducted for all topics except for “social determinants”, “perinatal”, “birth weight”, and “climate”. AMSTAR quality scores were significantly higher in more recently published systematic reviews, in those with meta-analysis, and in Cochrane reviews. There was evidence of variation of quality across topics even, after accounting for these characteristics. Genetic factors in asthma development were often covered by systematic reviews with some evidence of unsubstantiated updates or repetition. CONCLUSIONS: We present a comprehensive overview with an indexed database of published systematic reviews in asthma epidemiology including quality scores. We highlight some topics including active smoking and pets, which should be considered for future systematic reviews. We propose that our search strategy and database could be a basis for topic-specific overviews of systematic reviews in asthma epidemiology. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13601-017-0146-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-03-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5387188/ /pubmed/28400946 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13601-017-0146-y Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Genuneit, Jon
Seibold, Annina M.
Apfelbacher, Christian J.
Konstantinou, George N.
Koplin, Jennifer J.
La Grutta, Stefania
Logan, Kirsty
Flohr, Carsten
Perkin, Michael R.
The state of asthma epidemiology: an overview of systematic reviews and their quality
title The state of asthma epidemiology: an overview of systematic reviews and their quality
title_full The state of asthma epidemiology: an overview of systematic reviews and their quality
title_fullStr The state of asthma epidemiology: an overview of systematic reviews and their quality
title_full_unstemmed The state of asthma epidemiology: an overview of systematic reviews and their quality
title_short The state of asthma epidemiology: an overview of systematic reviews and their quality
title_sort state of asthma epidemiology: an overview of systematic reviews and their quality
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5387188/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28400946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13601-017-0146-y
work_keys_str_mv AT genuneitjon thestateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT seiboldanninam thestateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT apfelbacherchristianj thestateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT konstantinougeorgen thestateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT koplinjenniferj thestateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT lagruttastefania thestateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT logankirsty thestateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT flohrcarsten thestateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT perkinmichaelr thestateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT thestateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT genuneitjon stateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT seiboldanninam stateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT apfelbacherchristianj stateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT konstantinougeorgen stateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT koplinjenniferj stateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT lagruttastefania stateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT logankirsty stateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT flohrcarsten stateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT perkinmichaelr stateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality
AT stateofasthmaepidemiologyanoverviewofsystematicreviewsandtheirquality