Compliance of systematic reviews in ophthalmology with the PRISMA statement
- PMID: 29281981
- PMCID: PMC5745614
- DOI: 10.1186/s12874-017-0450-1
Compliance of systematic reviews in ophthalmology with the PRISMA statement
Abstract
Background: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are becoming increasingly important methods to summarize published research. Studies of ophthalmology may present additional challenges because of their potentially complex study designs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on topics in ophthalmology to determine compliance with the PRISMA guidelines. We assessed articles published between 2010 and 2015 in the five major relevant journals with the highest impact factors.
Methods: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched to identify systematic reviews published between January 2010 and December 2015 in the following 5 major ophthalmology journals: Progress in Retinal and Eye Research, Ophthalmology, Archives of Ophthalmology, American Journal of Ophthalmology, and Survey of Ophthalmology. The screening, identification, and scoring of articles were independently performed by two teams, and the results were submitted to statistical analysis to determine medians, ranges, and 95% CIs.
Results: A total of 115 articles were included. The median compliance was 15 out of 27 items (56%), the range was 5-26 (26-96%), and the inter-quartile range was 10 (37%). Compliance was highest in items related to the 'description of rationale' (item 3, 100%) and sequentially lower in 'the general interpretation of results' (item 26, 96%) and 'the inclusion of a structured summary in the abstract' (item 2, 90%). Compliance was poorest in the items 'indication of review protocol and registration' (item 5, 9%), 'specification of risk of biases that may affect the cumulative evidence' (item 15, 24%), and 'description of clear objectives in the introduction' (item 4, 26%).
Conclusion: The reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in ophthalmology should be significantly improved. While we recommend the use of the PRISMA criteria as a guideline before journal submission, additional research aimed at identifying potential barriers to compliance may be required to improve compliance with PRISMA guidelines.
Keywords: Meta-analysis; Ophthalmology; PRISMA; Reporting quality; Research methodology; Systematic reviews.
Conflict of interest statement
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable. This study does not involve human participants, human data or human tissue.
Consent for publication
Not applicable. This study does not involve individual data.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Compliance of Systematic Reviews in Plastic Surgery With the PRISMA Statement.JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2016 Mar-Apr;18(2):101-5. doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2015.1726. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2016. PMID: 26719993
-
Endorsement of PRISMA statement and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in nursing journals: a cross-sectional study.BMJ Open. 2017 Feb 7;7(2):e013905. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013905. BMJ Open. 2017. PMID: 28174224 Free PMC article.
-
Reporting quality of systematic reviews of interventions aimed at improving vaccination coverage: compliance with PRISMA guidelines.Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2019;15(12):2836-2843. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2019.1623998. Epub 2019 Jun 20. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2019. PMID: 31166843 Free PMC article.
-
An assessment of the compliance of systematic review articles published in craniofacial surgery with the PRISMA statement guidelines: A systematic review.J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016 Oct;44(10):1522-1530. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.07.018. Epub 2016 Aug 3. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016. PMID: 27575881 Review.
-
Systematic reviews in orthodontics: Impact of the PRISMA for Abstracts checklist on completeness of reporting.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019 Oct;156(4):442-452.e12. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.05.009. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019. PMID: 31582116 Review.
Cited by
-
Response to: Letter to the Editor, Minimally Invasive versus Open Surgery for Spinal Metastasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Asian Spine J. 2021 Oct;15(5):710-712. doi: 10.31616/asj.2021.0395.r2. Epub 2021 Oct 20. Asian Spine J. 2021. PMID: 34706406 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Assessing the compliance of systematic review articles published in leading dermatology journals with the PRISMA statement guidelines: A systematic review.JAAD Int. 2020 Sep 7;1(2):157-174. doi: 10.1016/j.jdin.2020.07.007. eCollection 2020 Dec. JAAD Int. 2020. PMID: 34409336 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Hemingway P, What is a systematic review? http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/painres/download/whatis/syst-revi... (accessed 2 Sep 2016).
-
- BMJ. 13. Study design and choosing a statistical test. http://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-readers/publications/statistics-s.... Accessed 15 Dec 2017.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources