대한예방한의학회지에 게재된 체계적 문헌고찰의 방법론 및 보고 질에 대한 평가
Methodological and Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews Published in Journal of Society of Preventive Korean Medicine
1
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Objectives : The publication of systematic reviews (SRs) has increased significantly over the years, and systematic reviews are considered to have the strongest evidence as they are at the top of the hierarchy of evidence pyramid. In this study, a thorough assessment of all SRs published in Journal of Society of Preventive Korean Medicine (JSPKM) was performed to evaluate their reporting quality and methodological quality to better improve the quality of SRs in JSPKM. Methods : JSPKM website was searched to include all SRs published in JSPKM from 1997 to 2018. Two independent researchers assessed the SRs using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR, formerly known as Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews) tool checklist for methodological quality assessment, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline checklist for reporting quality assessment. Results : Out of 618 published articles published in JSPKM from 1997 to 2018, only 3 SRs were identified as SRs. For AMSTAR methodological quality scoring, the average score of 3 SRs was 3.0 out of 11 which is low quality level. For PRISMA reporting quality items, the 3 SRs reported 17.3 items on average out of 27 items. The 3 identified SRs did not provide information on protocol or registration which is included in both AMSTAR assessment tool and PRISMA guideline. Conclusions : Improvements on reporting quality and methodological quality of SRs using relevant tools or guidelines are needed to assure the quality of SRs published in JSPKM so that their conclusions will be more transparent and reliable for decision-making in healthcare and the best clinical practice.
Abstract
Objectives : The publication of systematic reviews (SRs) has increased significantly over the years, and systematic reviews are considered to have the strongest evidence as they are at the top of the hierarchy of evidence pyramid. In this study, a thorough assessment of all SRs published in Journal of Society of Preventive Korean Medicine (JSPKM) was performed to evaluate their reporting quality and methodological quality to better improve the quality of SRs in JSPKM. Methods : JSPKM website was searched to include all SRs published in JSPKM from 1997 to 2018. Two independent researchers assessed the SRs using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR, formerly known as Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews) tool checklist for methodological quality assessment, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline checklist for reporting quality assessment. Results : Out of 618 published articles published in JSPKM from 1997 to 2018, only 3 SRs were identified as SRs. For AMSTAR methodological quality scoring, the average score of 3 SRs was 3.0 out of 11 which is low quality level. For PRISMA reporting quality items, the 3 SRs reported 17.3 items on average out of 27 items. The 3 identified SRs did not provide information on protocol or registration which is included in both AMSTAR assessment tool and PRISMA guideline. Conclusions : Improvements on reporting quality and methodological quality of SRs using relevant tools or guidelines are needed to assure the quality of SRs published in JSPKM so that their conclusions will be more transparent and reliable for decision-making in healthcare and the best clinical practice.
참고문헌 (34)
- Murad MH, "New evidence pyramid", Evidence Based Medicine, 21(4), pp.125~ (2016)
- Pussegoda K, "Systematic review adherence to methodological or reporting quality", Systematic Reviews, 6(1), pp.131~ (2017)
- Shea BJ, "Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews", BMC Med Res Methodol, 7(1), pp.10~ (2007)
- Shea BJ, "AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews", Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(10), pp.1013~1020 (2009)
- Moher D, "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement", PLOS Medicine, 6(7), pp.e1000097~ (2009)
- Moher D, "Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement", The Lancet, 354(9193), pp.1896~1900 (1999)
- 신우종, "체계적 고찰과 메타분석의 개요", Hanyang Medical Reviews, 35(1), pp.9~17 (2015), 한양대학교 의과대학[DOI]
- 김윤영, "AMSTAR를 활용한 국내 한의학 관련 체계적 문헌고찰 논문의 질 평가", 디지털융복합연구, 13(10), pp.549~559 (2015), 한국디지털정책학회[DOI]
- Lee MS, "Does moxibustion work? An overview of systematic reviews", BMC Research Notes, 3(1), pp.284~ (2010)
- Kang H-S, "The use of acupuncture for managing gynaecologic conditions: An overview of systematic reviews", Maturitas, 68(4), pp.346~354 (2011)
- 이명수, "Is Cupping an Effective Treatment? An Overview of Systematic Reviews", Journal of Acupuncture & Meridian Studies, 4(1), pp.1~4 (2011), 사단법인약침학회
- Lee MS, "Qigong for healthcare:an overview of systematic reviews", JRSM short reports, 2(2), pp.7~ (2011)
- Lee MS, "Systematic reviews of t’ai chi: an overview", British journal of sports medicine, 46(10), pp.713~718 (2012)
- Lee MS, "Acupuncture for surgical conditions: an overview of systematic reviews", International journal of clinical practice, 68(6), pp.783~789 (2014)
- Luo J, "Oral Chinese proprietary medicine for angina pectoris: an overview of systematic reviews", meta-analyses, 2014, pp.22(4), 787~800
- Xinke Z, "Chinese herbal medicine for the treatment of primary hypertension:a methodology overview of systematic reviews", Syst Rev, 5(1), pp.180~ (2016)
- Zhang X, "Traditional Chinese Patent Medicine for Acute Ischemic Stroke: An Overview of Systematic Reviews Based on the GRADE Approach", Medicine, 95(12), pp.e2986~ (2016)
- Lee B, "Oriental Herbal Medicine for Neurological Disorders in Children:An Overview of Systematic Reviews", The American Journal of Chinese Medicine, 46(08), pp.1701~1726 (2018)
- Kim TH, "Herbal Medicine for Vascular Dementia: an Overview of Systematic Reviews", Current vascular pharmacology (2019)
- Sasaki Y, "Complementary and Alternative Medicine for Breast Cancer Patients:An Overview of Systematic Reviews", Yakugaku zasshi : Journal of the Pharmaceutical Society of Japan, 139(7), pp.1027~1046 (2019)
- Shea BJ, "AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both", BMJ (Clinical research ed), 358, pp.9~ (2017)
- An N, "Abstracts of the 21st Cochrane Colloquium" (2013), John Wiley & Sons
- 민현주, "한·양방 협진에 대한 의사들의 인식변화 ―국내 문헌에 대한 체계적 고찰―", 대한예방한의학회지, 16(1), pp.15~29 (2012), 대한예방한의학회[DOI]
- 김숙경, "한의학에 대한 의사들의 인식과 태도 변화에 관한 체계적 문헌 고찰", 대한예방한의학회지, 17(3), pp.31~46 (2013), 대한예방한의학회
- 박유리, "한의약 금연 임상연구의 체계적 고찰 - 연구 설계를 중심으로", 대한예방한의학회지, 19(3), pp.115~129 (2015), 대한예방한의학회
- "AMSTAR - a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews"[URL]
- Booth A, "The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews", Systematic reviews, 1, pp.2~2 (2012)
- "PROSPERO - International prospective register of systematic reviews"[URL]
- Liu Y, "Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews", Meta-Analyses of Acupuncture, 2014, pp.9(11), e113172~
- "Systematic Reviews: CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care" (2009)[URL]
- Delgado-Rodriguez M, "Systematic review and meta-analysis", Medicina Intensiva (English Edition), 42(7), pp.444~453 (2018)
- Griffiths PG, "Letter to the Editor concerning “A systematic review of controlled trials on visual stress using intuitive overlays or colorimeter”", J Optom, 10(3), pp.199~200 (2017)