Cargando…
Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in Saudi journals from 1997 to 2017
OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality of the meta-analyses (MAs) and systematic reviews (SRs) in Saudi journals indexed in PubMed using 2 scales: A MeaSurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) and the overview quality assessment questionnaire (OQAQ). METHODS: This study focused on SRs/MAs publ...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Saudi Medical Journal
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6535175/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31056617 http://dx.doi.org/10.15537/smj.2019.5.23690 |
_version_ | 1783421551359557632 |
---|---|
author | Natto, Zuhair S. AlGhamdi, Doaa S. |
author_facet | Natto, Zuhair S. AlGhamdi, Doaa S. |
author_sort | Natto, Zuhair S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality of the meta-analyses (MAs) and systematic reviews (SRs) in Saudi journals indexed in PubMed using 2 scales: A MeaSurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) and the overview quality assessment questionnaire (OQAQ). METHODS: This study focused on SRs/MAs published in 8 Saudi journals. We investigated, screened, and extracted the data, which included recording the main topic of each SRs/MAs and the date of publication. Furthermore, we assessed the quality of each included SRs/MAs using the AMSTAR and the OQAQ. The reviews concluded in January 2018. RESULTS: The search uncovered 201 unique articles; of these, the researchers screened 110 full texts and included 103 in this review. Most of the included studies were published in Saudi Medical Journal (50 articles, 48.5%), followed by Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology (21 articles, 20.4%), and Annals of Saudi Medicine (16 articles, 15.5%). The main topics in these published articles were gastroenterology (20 articles, 19.5%), followed by oncology (14 articles, 13.7%), and pharmacology (9 articles, 8.7%). The AMSTAR and the OQAQ scales showed that most SRs/MAs were of medium quality. CONCLUSION: Quality of SRs and MAs published in Saudi journals was distributed in all categories (low, medium, and high) and it can be improved using critical evaluation by authors, journal editors, and readers. PROSPERO REG. NO. CRD: 42018102210 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6535175 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Saudi Medical Journal |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65351752019-06-12 Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in Saudi journals from 1997 to 2017 Natto, Zuhair S. AlGhamdi, Doaa S. Saudi Med J Systematic Review OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality of the meta-analyses (MAs) and systematic reviews (SRs) in Saudi journals indexed in PubMed using 2 scales: A MeaSurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) and the overview quality assessment questionnaire (OQAQ). METHODS: This study focused on SRs/MAs published in 8 Saudi journals. We investigated, screened, and extracted the data, which included recording the main topic of each SRs/MAs and the date of publication. Furthermore, we assessed the quality of each included SRs/MAs using the AMSTAR and the OQAQ. The reviews concluded in January 2018. RESULTS: The search uncovered 201 unique articles; of these, the researchers screened 110 full texts and included 103 in this review. Most of the included studies were published in Saudi Medical Journal (50 articles, 48.5%), followed by Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology (21 articles, 20.4%), and Annals of Saudi Medicine (16 articles, 15.5%). The main topics in these published articles were gastroenterology (20 articles, 19.5%), followed by oncology (14 articles, 13.7%), and pharmacology (9 articles, 8.7%). The AMSTAR and the OQAQ scales showed that most SRs/MAs were of medium quality. CONCLUSION: Quality of SRs and MAs published in Saudi journals was distributed in all categories (low, medium, and high) and it can be improved using critical evaluation by authors, journal editors, and readers. PROSPERO REG. NO. CRD: 42018102210 Saudi Medical Journal 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6535175/ /pubmed/31056617 http://dx.doi.org/10.15537/smj.2019.5.23690 Text en Copyright: © Saudi Medical Journal http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Natto, Zuhair S. AlGhamdi, Doaa S. Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in Saudi journals from 1997 to 2017 |
title | Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in Saudi journals from 1997 to 2017 |
title_full | Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in Saudi journals from 1997 to 2017 |
title_fullStr | Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in Saudi journals from 1997 to 2017 |
title_full_unstemmed | Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in Saudi journals from 1997 to 2017 |
title_short | Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in Saudi journals from 1997 to 2017 |
title_sort | quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in saudi journals from 1997 to 2017 |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6535175/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31056617 http://dx.doi.org/10.15537/smj.2019.5.23690 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nattozuhairs qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewsandmetaanalysespublishedinsaudijournalsfrom1997to2017 AT alghamdidoaas qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewsandmetaanalysespublishedinsaudijournalsfrom1997to2017 |