Evaluation of the Reporting Standard Guidelines of Network Meta-Analyses in Physical Therapy: A Systematic Review

被引:2
|
作者
Cho, Sung-Hyoun [1 ]
Shin, In-Soo [2 ]
机构
[1] Nambu Univ, Dept Phys Therapy, 23 Cheomdan Jungang Ro, Gwangju 62271, South Korea
[2] Dongguk Univ, Grad Sch Educ, AI Convergence Educ, 30 Pildong Ro 1 Gil, Seoul 04620, South Korea
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
systematic review; network meta-analysis; treatment outcome; checklist; randomized controlled trials; PAIN RELIEF; INTERVENTIONS;
D O I
10.3390/healthcare10122371
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
The concept of network meta-analyses (NMA) has been introduced to the field of physical therapy. However, the reporting standard guidelines of these studies have not been evaluated. In this systematic review, we included all published NMA physical therapy studies that compared the clinical efficacy of three or more interventions to evaluate whether NMAs in physical therapy exhibit adequate reporting recommendations. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to 30 June 2022. Among the 252 identified articles, 19 NMAs including 805 randomized controlled trials were included. We applied both preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) and PRISMA-NMA checklists, which are 27- and 32-item reporting standard guidelines assessment tools, respectively. Protocol registrations (68.4%), risk of bias across studies (63.2%), additional analysis (57.9%), and funding (31.6%) were problematic items considering the PRISMA guidelines. Four studies reported all five new NMA-reporting items, and 15 (78.9%) did not address items S1-5 from the PRISMA-NMA guidelines. The median score (interquartile range) of the reporting standard guidelines was 27.0 (25.8-28.0). The identified shortcomings of published NMAs should be addressed while training researchers, and they should be encouraged to apply PRISMA-NMA, as a recognized tool for assessing NMA reporting guidelines is required.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Reporting and methodological quality of acupuncture network meta-analyses could be improved: an evidence mapping
    Wang, Yan
    Chen, Nan
    Guo, Kangle
    Li, Yanfei
    E, Fenfen
    Yang, Chaoqun
    Shang, Xue
    Li, Xiuxia
    Yang, Kehu
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2023, 153 : 1 - 12
  • [22] The reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in vascular surgery needs improvement: A systematic review
    Tan, Wei Keith
    Wigley, James
    Shantikumar, Saran
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2014, 12 (12) : 1262 - 1265
  • [23] Author guidelines for conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
    Prill, Robert
    Karlsson, Jon
    Ayeni, Olufemi R.
    Becker, Roland
    KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2021, 29 (09) : 2739 - 2744
  • [24] The Utilization of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Stroke Guidelines
    Ghozy, Sherief
    Kobeissi, Hassan
    Amoukhteh, Melika
    Kadirvel, Ramanathan
    Brinjikji, Waleed
    Rabinstein, Alejandro A.
    Carpenter, Christopher R.
    Kallmes, David F.
    BRAIN SCIENCES, 2024, 14 (07)
  • [25] Author guidelines for conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
    Robert Prill
    Jon Karlsson
    Olufemi R. Ayeni
    Roland Becker
    Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2021, 29 : 2739 - 2744
  • [26] An Assessment of the Methodological Quality of Published Network Meta-Analyses: A Systematic Review
    Chambers, James D.
    Naci, Huseyin
    Wouters, Olivier J.
    Pyo, Junhee
    Gunjal, Shalak
    Kennedy, Ian R.
    Hoey, Mark G.
    Winn, Aaron
    Neumann, Peter J.
    PLOS ONE, 2015, 10 (04):
  • [27] Evaluation of the Endorsement of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Statement on the Quality of Published Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses
    Panic, Nikola
    Leoncini, Emanuele
    de Belvis, Giulio
    Ricciardi, Walter
    Boccia, Stefania
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (12):
  • [28] Reporting Guidelines and the American Journal of Public Health's Adoption of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
    McLeroy, Kenneth R.
    Northridge, Mary E.
    Balcazar, Hector
    Greenberg, Michael R.
    Landers, Stewart J.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2012, 102 (05) : 780 - 784
  • [29] Does type of funding affect reporting in network meta-analysis? A scoping review of network meta-analyses
    Areti Angeliki Veroniki
    Eric Kai Chung Wong
    Carole Lunny
    Juan Camilo Martinez Molina
    Ivan D. Florez
    Andrea C. Tricco
    Sharon E. Straus
    Systematic Reviews, 12
  • [30] Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews or meta-analyses in nursing field in China
    Jin, Ying-hui
    Ma, En-ting
    Gao, Wei-jie
    Hua, Wei
    Dou, Hao-ying
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING PRACTICE, 2014, 20 (01) : 70 - 78