본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

대한한방부인과학회지에 게재된 체계적 문헌고찰의 방법론 및 보고의 질 평가

A Methodological and Reporting Quality Assessment of the Systematic Reviews in the Journal of Korean Obstetrics and Gynecology

2

조회

0

다운로드

2

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류한의학

초록

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to assess the methodological and reporting quality of the systematic reviews in the Journal of Korean obstetrics and gynecology. Methods: Systematic reviews in the Journal of Korean obstetrics and gynecology were selected from January 1987 to February 2021, by searching Koreanstudies Information Service System (KISS) and the search system of the Society of Korean medicine obstetrics and gynecology. The methodological and reporting quality was assessed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) tool and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Results: Total of 19 systematic reviews were finally included for this study. The levels of methodological quality were low in 63.2% and very low in 36.8%. As a result of evaluating the reporting quality, 22 to 15 (average 18.6) items out of 27 items (81.5 to 55.6%) were reported. Conclusions: The results of a systematic review are helpful in giving a high level of evidence. In order to improve the quality of systematic reviews published in the Journal of Korean Obstetrics and Gynecology, it is necessary to perform and report according to the the PRISMA checklist and AMSTAR 2.

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to assess the methodological and reporting quality of the systematic reviews in the Journal of Korean obstetrics and gynecology. Methods: Systematic reviews in the Journal of Korean obstetrics and gynecology were selected from January 1987 to February 2021, by searching Koreanstudies Information Service System (KISS) and the search system of the Society of Korean medicine obstetrics and gynecology. The methodological and reporting quality was assessed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) tool and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Results: Total of 19 systematic reviews were finally included for this study. The levels of methodological quality were low in 63.2% and very low in 36.8%. As a result of evaluating the reporting quality, 22 to 15 (average 18.6) items out of 27 items (81.5 to 55.6%) were reported. Conclusions: The results of a systematic review are helpful in giving a high level of evidence. In order to improve the quality of systematic reviews published in the Journal of Korean Obstetrics and Gynecology, it is necessary to perform and report according to the the PRISMA checklist and AMSTAR 2.

참고문헌 (37)

  1. Mulrow CD, "Rationale for systematic reviews", BMJ, 309(6954), pp.597~599 (1994)
  2. Pearson A, "Translational science and evidence-based healthcare: a clarification and reconceptualization of how knowledge is generated and used in healthcare", Nurs Res Pract, 2012(1), pp.e792519~ (2012)
  3. Chalmers I, "Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence", Lancet, 374(9683), pp.86~89 (2009)
  4. Moher D, "Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses", Lancet, 354(9193), pp.1896~1900 (1999)
  5. Liberati A, "The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration", PLoS Med, 6(7), pp.e1000100~ (2009)
  6. Shea BJ, "AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews", J Clin Epidemiol, 62(10), pp.1013~1020 (2009)
  7. Shea BJ, "AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both", BMJ, 358, pp.j4008~ (2017)
  8. 김정희, "국내 간호학 분야 메타분석 논문의 질 평가", Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing, 43(6), pp.736~745 (2013), 한국간호과학회
  9. 심수보, "대한한방소아과학회지에 게재된 체계적 문헌고찰의 보고 질 및 방법론적 질 평가", 대한한방소아과학회지, 34(1), pp.26~36 (2020), 대한한방소아과학회[DOI]
  10. 송은혜, "대한예방한의학회지에 게재된 체계적 문헌고찰의 방법론 및 보고 질에 대한 평가", 대한예방한의학회지, 23(2), pp.67~76 (2019), 대한예방한의학회[DOI]
  11. Haidich AB, "Meta-analysis in medical research", Hippokratia, 14(Suppl 1), pp.29~37 (2010)
  12. 김세화, "다낭성 난소 증후군의 침치료 연구에 관한 체계적 문헌고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 27(2), pp.71~82 (2014), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  13. 백선은, "위축성 질염의 좌훈 치료 연구에 관한 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 29(1), pp.92~101 (2016), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  14. 배주은, "다낭성 난소 증후군을 이환하는 난임 환자에서 통합 의학 치료의 효과 : 체계적 문헌 고찰 및 메타분석", 대한한방부인과학회지, 30(4), pp.59~76 (2017), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  15. 정서윤, "유방염의 침구 치료에 대한 체계적 문헌고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 30(3), pp.29~39 (2017), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  16. 김유정, "산후 유즙분비부전에 대한 침 치료 효과 : 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 30(3), pp.79~91 (2017), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  17. 이혜인, "원발성 월경곤란증의 뜸 치료에 대한 체계적 문헌고찰 및 메타분석", 대한한방부인과학회지, 30(2), pp.107~119 (2017), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  18. 박남춘, "원발성 월경통의 전침 치료 연구에 관한 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 30(2), pp.81~92 (2017), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  19. 송미화, "갱년기 안면홍조에 대한 매선치료 : 체계적 문헌고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 30(2), pp.71~80 (2017), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  20. 박어진, "기능성 자궁출혈에 대한 한약치료 : 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 31(4), pp.110~127 (2018), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  21. 박경덕, "진균성 질염의 한약 훈증 치료에 대한 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 31(3), pp.20~32 (2018), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  22. 윤준걸, "다낭성 난소증후군의 전침 치료의 연구에 관한 체계적 문헌고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 31(4), pp.39~53 (2018), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  23. 배주은, "자궁내막증의 혈위 첩부 치료에 대한 체계적 문헌고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 32(3), pp.162~173 (2019), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  24. 정재웅, "자궁선근증에 대한 한약의 효과 : 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 32(4), pp.87~101 (2019), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  25. 남은영, "위축성 질염의 한약 치료 임상 연구에 관한 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 32(3), pp.245~262 (2019), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  26. 박어진, "위축성 질염에 대한 한약 투약의 효과 : 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 32(3), pp.227~244 (2019), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  27. 하수진, "여성 과민성 방광 전침 치료의 무작위 대조군 연구에 관한 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 33(3), pp.1~19 (2020), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  28. 김수경, "월경전증후군의 한약 치료 효과에 관한 무작위대조비교임상시험연구에 대한 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 33(4), pp.36~55 (2020), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  29. 이수정, "자궁경부 상피내종양의 환상투열요법 후 한약치료의 효과 : 체계적 문헌고찰 및 메타분석", 대한한방부인과학회지, 33(2), pp.44~62 (2020), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  30. 박혜린, "여성 복압성 요실금에 대한 뜸 치료의 효과: 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한한방부인과학회지, 33(4), pp.1~22 (2020), 대한한방부인과학회[DOI]
  31. Petrie A, "Further statistics in dentistry Part 8 : Systematic reviews and meta-analyses", Br Dent J, 194(2), pp.73~78 (2003)
  32. Sauerland S, "Role of systematic reviews and meta-analysis in evidence-based medicine", World J Surg, 29(5), pp.582~587 (2005)
  33. Whiting P, "ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed", Recenti Prog Med, 109(9), pp.421~431 (2018)
  34. Tian J, "The methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews from China and the USA are similar", J Clin Epidemiol, 85, pp.50~58 (2017)
  35. Tian ZY, "An Overview of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses on Acupuncture for Post-acute Stroke Dysphagia", Geriatrics(Basel), 4(4), pp.68~ (2019)
  36. Li YX, "Effectiveness and Safety of Acupuncture for Migraine: An Overview of Systematic Reviews", Pain Res Manag, 2020, pp.3825617~ (2020)
  37. Tawfik GM, "Protocol registration issues of systematic review and meta-analysis studies: a survey of global researchers", BMC Med Res Methodol, 20(1), pp.213~ (2020)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (9건)