Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of the Bariatric Surgery for Diabetes Mellitus
Objective. Using the AMSTAR tool, this study evaluated the quality of systematic reviews (SRs) that assessed the efficacy of bariatric surgery in diabetic patients. We aimed to identify studies that can be used as clinical references. Methods. Medline (via PubMed), EMBASE, Epistemonikos, Web of Scie...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2019-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Diabetes Research |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9541638 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832547602870042624 |
|---|---|
| author | Xinye Jin Jinjing Wang Xueqiong Li Ping An Haibin Wang Wenfeng Mao Qi Zhou Yaolong Chen Jie Wang Kang Chen Yiming Mu |
| author_facet | Xinye Jin Jinjing Wang Xueqiong Li Ping An Haibin Wang Wenfeng Mao Qi Zhou Yaolong Chen Jie Wang Kang Chen Yiming Mu |
| author_sort | Xinye Jin |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objective. Using the AMSTAR tool, this study evaluated the quality of systematic reviews (SRs) that assessed the efficacy of bariatric surgery in diabetic patients. We aimed to identify studies that can be used as clinical references. Methods. Medline (via PubMed), EMBASE, Epistemonikos, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, and Wanfang Data were systematically searched from inception to December 31, 2017. Two reviewers independently selected SRs and extracted data. Disagreements were solved by discussions or through consultation with a third reviewer. Reviewers extracted data (characteristics of included SRs, e.g., publication year, language, and number of authors) into the predefined tables in the Microsoft Excel 2013 sheet. Data were visualized using the forest plot in RevMan 5.3 software. Results. A total of 64 SRs were included. The average AMSTAR score was 7.4±1.7. AMSTAR scores of 7 (n=21, 32.8%) and 8 (n=14, 28.1%) were most common. The AMSTAR scores of SRs published before 2016 (n=46, 71.9%) were compared with SRs published after 2016 (n=18, 28.1%), and no significant differences were observed (MD=−0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.65-0.07, P=0.07). For SRs published in Chinese (n=17, 26.6%) compared to those published in English (n=47, 73.4%), the AMSTAR scores significantly differed (MD=0.21, 95% CI (-0.55, 0.97), P=0.59). For SRs published in China (n=33, 51.6%) compared to those published outside of China (n=31, 48.4%), significant differences in the AMSTAR scores were observed (MD=1.10, 95% CI (0.29, 1.91), P=0.008). For SRs with an author number≤6 (n=31, 48.4%) compared to SRs with authors≥6 (n=33, 51.6%), no significant differences were observed (MD=−0.36, 95% CI (-1.22, 0.50), P=0.41). For high-quality SRs published after 2016 (n=11, 17.2%) compared to other SRs (n=53, 82.8%), statistically significant differences were noted (MD=1.75, 95% CI (1.01, 2.49), P<0.00001). Conclusions. The number of SRs assessing the efficacy of bariatric surgery in diabetic patients is increasing by year, but only a small number meet the criteria to support guideline recommendations. Study protocols not being registered, grey literature not retrieved, incorporation of grey literature as exclusion criteria, and failure to evaluate publication bias and report a conflict of interest were the main causes of low AMSTAR scores. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-d018aea1033b49c7834cb21d19246e11 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2314-6745 2314-6753 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2019-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Diabetes Research |
| spelling | doaj-art-d018aea1033b49c7834cb21d19246e112025-02-03T06:44:21ZengWileyJournal of Diabetes Research2314-67452314-67532019-01-01201910.1155/2019/95416389541638Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of the Bariatric Surgery for Diabetes MellitusXinye Jin0Jinjing Wang1Xueqiong Li2Ping An3Haibin Wang4Wenfeng Mao5Qi Zhou6Yaolong Chen7Jie Wang8Kang Chen9Yiming Mu10Department of Endocrinology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, ChinaDepartment of Endocrinology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, ChinaDepartment of Endocrinology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, ChinaDepartment of Endocrinology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, ChinaDepartment of Endocrinology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, ChinaDepartment of Endocrinology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, ChinaEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, ChinaEvidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, ChinaDepartment of Endocrinology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, ChinaDepartment of Endocrinology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, ChinaDepartment of Endocrinology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, ChinaObjective. Using the AMSTAR tool, this study evaluated the quality of systematic reviews (SRs) that assessed the efficacy of bariatric surgery in diabetic patients. We aimed to identify studies that can be used as clinical references. Methods. Medline (via PubMed), EMBASE, Epistemonikos, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, and Wanfang Data were systematically searched from inception to December 31, 2017. Two reviewers independently selected SRs and extracted data. Disagreements were solved by discussions or through consultation with a third reviewer. Reviewers extracted data (characteristics of included SRs, e.g., publication year, language, and number of authors) into the predefined tables in the Microsoft Excel 2013 sheet. Data were visualized using the forest plot in RevMan 5.3 software. Results. A total of 64 SRs were included. The average AMSTAR score was 7.4±1.7. AMSTAR scores of 7 (n=21, 32.8%) and 8 (n=14, 28.1%) were most common. The AMSTAR scores of SRs published before 2016 (n=46, 71.9%) were compared with SRs published after 2016 (n=18, 28.1%), and no significant differences were observed (MD=−0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.65-0.07, P=0.07). For SRs published in Chinese (n=17, 26.6%) compared to those published in English (n=47, 73.4%), the AMSTAR scores significantly differed (MD=0.21, 95% CI (-0.55, 0.97), P=0.59). For SRs published in China (n=33, 51.6%) compared to those published outside of China (n=31, 48.4%), significant differences in the AMSTAR scores were observed (MD=1.10, 95% CI (0.29, 1.91), P=0.008). For SRs with an author number≤6 (n=31, 48.4%) compared to SRs with authors≥6 (n=33, 51.6%), no significant differences were observed (MD=−0.36, 95% CI (-1.22, 0.50), P=0.41). For high-quality SRs published after 2016 (n=11, 17.2%) compared to other SRs (n=53, 82.8%), statistically significant differences were noted (MD=1.75, 95% CI (1.01, 2.49), P<0.00001). Conclusions. The number of SRs assessing the efficacy of bariatric surgery in diabetic patients is increasing by year, but only a small number meet the criteria to support guideline recommendations. Study protocols not being registered, grey literature not retrieved, incorporation of grey literature as exclusion criteria, and failure to evaluate publication bias and report a conflict of interest were the main causes of low AMSTAR scores.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9541638 |
| spellingShingle | Xinye Jin Jinjing Wang Xueqiong Li Ping An Haibin Wang Wenfeng Mao Qi Zhou Yaolong Chen Jie Wang Kang Chen Yiming Mu Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of the Bariatric Surgery for Diabetes Mellitus Journal of Diabetes Research |
| title | Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of the Bariatric Surgery for Diabetes Mellitus |
| title_full | Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of the Bariatric Surgery for Diabetes Mellitus |
| title_fullStr | Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of the Bariatric Surgery for Diabetes Mellitus |
| title_full_unstemmed | Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of the Bariatric Surgery for Diabetes Mellitus |
| title_short | Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of the Bariatric Surgery for Diabetes Mellitus |
| title_sort | quality assessment of systematic review of the bariatric surgery for diabetes mellitus |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9541638 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT xinyejin qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus AT jinjingwang qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus AT xueqiongli qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus AT pingan qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus AT haibinwang qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus AT wenfengmao qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus AT qizhou qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus AT yaolongchen qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus AT jiewang qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus AT kangchen qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus AT yimingmu qualityassessmentofsystematicreviewofthebariatricsurgeryfordiabetesmellitus |