The Assessment of the Quality of Reporting of Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses in Diagnostic Tests Published by Authors in China

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0085908

CORC > 兰州大学 > 兰州大学 > 基础医学院 > 期刊论文

	The Assessment of the Quality of Reporting of Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses in Diagnostic Tests Published by Authors in China
	Ge, L; Wang, JC; Li, JL; Liang, L; An, N; Shi, XT; Liu, YC; Tian, JH; Tian, JH (reprint author), Lanzhou Univ, Sch Basic Med Sci, Evidence Based Med Ctr, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China.
刊名	PLOS ONE
	2014-01-21
卷号	9 期号:1 页码:-
ISSN号	1932-6203
DOI	10.1371/journal.pone.0085908
文献子类	Article
英文摘要	Background: The quality of reporting in systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) of diagnostic tests published by authors in China has not been evaluated. The aims of present study are to evaluate the quality of reporting in diagnostic SRs/MAs using the PRISMA statement and determine the changes in the quality of reporting over time. Methods: According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we searched five databases including Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of knowledge, to identify SRs/MAs on diagnostic tests. The searches were conducted on July 14, 2012 and the cut off for inclusion of the SRs/MAs was December 31st 2011. The PRISMA statement was used to assess the quality of reporting. Analysis was performed using Excel 2003, RevMan 5. Results: A total of 312 studies were included. Fifteen diseases systems were covered. According to the PRISMA checklist, there had been serious reporting flaws in following items: structured summary (item 2, 22.4%), objectives (item 4, 18.9%), protocol and registration (item 5, 2.6%), risk of bias across studies (item 15, 26.3%), funding (item 27, 28.8%). The subgroup analysis showed that there had been some statistically significant improvement in total compliance for 9 PRISMA items after the PRISMA was released, 6 items were statistically improved regarding funded articles, 3 items were statistically improved for CSCD articles, and there was a statistically significant increase in the proportion of reviews reporting on 22 items for SCI articles (P<0.050). Conclusion: The numbers of diagnostic SRs/MAs is increasing annually. The quality of reporting has measurably been improved over the previous years. Unfortunately, there are still many deficiencies in the reporting including protocol and registration, search, risk of bias across studies, and funding. Future Chinese reviewers should address issues on these aspects.
学科主题	Science & Technology - Other Topics
出版地	SAN FRANCISCO
语种	英语
WOS记录号	WOS:000330244500141
内容类型	期刊论文
源URL	[http://ir.lzu.edu.cn/handle/262010/121675]
专题	基础医学院_期刊论文
通讯作者	Tian, JH (reprint author), Lanzhou Univ, Sch Basic Med Sci, Evidence Based Med Ctr, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China.
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Ge, L,Wang, JC,Li, JL,et al. The Assessment of the Quality of Reporting of Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses in Diagnostic Tests Published by Authors in China[J]. PLOS ONE,2014,9(1):-.
APA	Ge, L.,Wang, JC.,Li, JL.,Liang, L.,An, N.,...&Tian, JH .(2014).The Assessment of the Quality of Reporting of Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses in Diagnostic Tests Published by Authors in China.PLOS ONE,9(1),-.
MLA	Ge, L,et al."The Assessment of the Quality of Reporting of Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses in Diagnostic Tests Published by Authors in China".PLOS ONE 9.1(2014):-.