Document Detail


Need for quality improvement in renal systematic reviews.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  18400967     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Systematic reviews of clinical studies aim to compile best available evidence for various diagnosis and treatment options. This study assessed the methodologic quality of all systematic reviews relevant to the practice of nephrology published in 2005.
DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We searched electronic databases (Medline, Embase, American College of Physicians Journal Club, Cochrane) and hand searched Cochrane renal group records. Clinical practice guidelines, case reports, narrative reviews, and pooled individual patient data meta-analyses were excluded. Methodologic quality was measured using a validated questionnaire (Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire). For reviews of randomized trials, we also evaluated adherence to recommended reporting guidelines (Quality of Reporting of Meta-Analyses).
RESULTS: Ninety renal systematic reviews were published in year 2005, 60 of which focused on therapy. Many systematic reviews (54%) had major methodologic flaws. The most common review flaws were failure to assess the methodologic quality of included primary studies and failure to minimize bias in study inclusion. Only 2% of reviews of randomized trials fully adhered to reporting guidelines. A minority of journals (four of 48) endorsed adherence to consensus guidelines for review reporting, and these journals published systematic reviews of higher methodologic quality (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of systematic reviews had major methodologic flaws. The majority of journals do not endorse consensus guidelines for review reporting in their instructions to authors; however, journals that recommended such adherence published systemic reviews of higher methodologic quality.
Authors:
Marko Mrkobrada; Heather Thiessen-Philbrook; R Brian Haynes; Arthur V Iansavichus; Faisal Rehman; Amit X Garg
Related Documents :
18729847 - Systematic review: adverse event reports for oral sodium phosphate and polyethylene gly...
15925067 - Urine markers for bladder cancer surveillance: a systematic review.
19034207 - Extracting key messages from systematic reviews.
19824937 - Pharmacological management of constipation.
2253577 - Chédiak-higashi syndrome: a case report on an african infant.
3690487 - Manic-like reaction induced by lorazepam withdrawal.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't     Date:  2008-04-09
Journal Detail:
Title:  Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN     Volume:  3     ISSN:  1555-905X     ISO Abbreviation:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol     Publication Date:  2008 Jul 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2008-06-30     Completed Date:  2008-08-26     Revised Date:  2013-06-05    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  101271570     Medline TA:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  1102-14     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
Division of Nephrology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Benchmarking
Clinical Trials as Topic
Editorial Policies*
Evidence-Based Medicine
Guideline Adherence
Guidelines as Topic
Humans
Nephrology / standards*
Periodicals as Topic / standards*
Quality Control
Review Literature as Topic*
Comments/Corrections

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Albumin excretion rate in normal adolescents: relation to insulin resistance and cardiovascular risk...
Next Document:  Introduction to Vitamin D Symposium, March 14, 2008.