Cargando…

Risk of Bias Assessment in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions for Premenstrual Syndrome: A Systematic Review

Objective: Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) is a very prevalent condition that affects premenopausal women and can result in monthly debilitating emotional and physical symptoms. The objective of this systematic review was to determine which predictive factors were associated with an increased amount of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tehfe, Hadi, Chow, Ryan, Li, Sophie, Kim, Patrick, Samari, Saif, Hayawi, Lamia, Webster, Richard, Ben Fadel, Nadya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9678845/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36457654
http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/jfrh.v16i2.9476
_version_ 1784834078017585152
author Tehfe, Hadi
Chow, Ryan
Li, Sophie
Kim, Patrick
Samari, Saif
Hayawi, Lamia
Webster, Richard
Ben Fadel, Nadya
author_facet Tehfe, Hadi
Chow, Ryan
Li, Sophie
Kim, Patrick
Samari, Saif
Hayawi, Lamia
Webster, Richard
Ben Fadel, Nadya
author_sort Tehfe, Hadi
collection PubMed
description Objective: Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) is a very prevalent condition that affects premenopausal women and can result in monthly debilitating emotional and physical symptoms. The objective of this systematic review was to determine which predictive factors were associated with an increased amount of bias in non-randomized studies (NRSs) of PMS. Materials and methods: A search of the EMBASE and Medline electronic databases was completed from January 1, 2010 to December 2021. The methodological quality of the included studies was independently evaluated and critically appraised using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-1) tool. Associations of different factors with the risk of bias levels were assessed using a univariate logistic regression. Odds ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported. Results: Of the 1668 studies, 38 were determined to be eligible for inclusion. The ROBINS-1 tool identified that 12 studies were of low/moderate risk of bias (31.6%) and 26 were of serious/critical risk (68.4%). Evidence of relationships between the ROBINS-1 score and impact factor (OR=0.20; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.57; p= 0.003) and number of authors (OR=0.65; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.99; p= 0.046) were identified, whereas no relationships were found with the number of citations, the sample size, the funding type, or the conflict-of-interest statement. Conclusion: The systematic review concludes that the methodological rigor of non-randomized studies of PMS can vary, with fewer authors and a lower impact factor showing evidence of association with a decreased quality of evidence.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9678845
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Tehran University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96788452022-11-30 Risk of Bias Assessment in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions for Premenstrual Syndrome: A Systematic Review Tehfe, Hadi Chow, Ryan Li, Sophie Kim, Patrick Samari, Saif Hayawi, Lamia Webster, Richard Ben Fadel, Nadya J Family Reprod Health Review Article Objective: Premenstrual syndrome (PMS) is a very prevalent condition that affects premenopausal women and can result in monthly debilitating emotional and physical symptoms. The objective of this systematic review was to determine which predictive factors were associated with an increased amount of bias in non-randomized studies (NRSs) of PMS. Materials and methods: A search of the EMBASE and Medline electronic databases was completed from January 1, 2010 to December 2021. The methodological quality of the included studies was independently evaluated and critically appraised using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-1) tool. Associations of different factors with the risk of bias levels were assessed using a univariate logistic regression. Odds ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported. Results: Of the 1668 studies, 38 were determined to be eligible for inclusion. The ROBINS-1 tool identified that 12 studies were of low/moderate risk of bias (31.6%) and 26 were of serious/critical risk (68.4%). Evidence of relationships between the ROBINS-1 score and impact factor (OR=0.20; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.57; p= 0.003) and number of authors (OR=0.65; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.99; p= 0.046) were identified, whereas no relationships were found with the number of citations, the sample size, the funding type, or the conflict-of-interest statement. Conclusion: The systematic review concludes that the methodological rigor of non-randomized studies of PMS can vary, with fewer authors and a lower impact factor showing evidence of association with a decreased quality of evidence. Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2022-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9678845/ /pubmed/36457654 http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/jfrh.v16i2.9476 Text en Copyright © 2022 Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Published by Tehran University of Medical Sciences. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Tehfe, Hadi
Chow, Ryan
Li, Sophie
Kim, Patrick
Samari, Saif
Hayawi, Lamia
Webster, Richard
Ben Fadel, Nadya
Risk of Bias Assessment in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions for Premenstrual Syndrome: A Systematic Review
title Risk of Bias Assessment in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions for Premenstrual Syndrome: A Systematic Review
title_full Risk of Bias Assessment in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions for Premenstrual Syndrome: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Risk of Bias Assessment in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions for Premenstrual Syndrome: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Risk of Bias Assessment in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions for Premenstrual Syndrome: A Systematic Review
title_short Risk of Bias Assessment in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions for Premenstrual Syndrome: A Systematic Review
title_sort risk of bias assessment in non-randomized studies of interventions for premenstrual syndrome: a systematic review
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9678845/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36457654
http://dx.doi.org/10.18502/jfrh.v16i2.9476
work_keys_str_mv AT tehfehadi riskofbiasassessmentinnonrandomizedstudiesofinterventionsforpremenstrualsyndromeasystematicreview
AT chowryan riskofbiasassessmentinnonrandomizedstudiesofinterventionsforpremenstrualsyndromeasystematicreview
AT lisophie riskofbiasassessmentinnonrandomizedstudiesofinterventionsforpremenstrualsyndromeasystematicreview
AT kimpatrick riskofbiasassessmentinnonrandomizedstudiesofinterventionsforpremenstrualsyndromeasystematicreview
AT samarisaif riskofbiasassessmentinnonrandomizedstudiesofinterventionsforpremenstrualsyndromeasystematicreview
AT hayawilamia riskofbiasassessmentinnonrandomizedstudiesofinterventionsforpremenstrualsyndromeasystematicreview
AT websterrichard riskofbiasassessmentinnonrandomizedstudiesofinterventionsforpremenstrualsyndromeasystematicreview
AT benfadelnadya riskofbiasassessmentinnonrandomizedstudiesofinterventionsforpremenstrualsyndromeasystematicreview