Validity of data extraction in acupuncture meta-analysis: a reproducibility study protocol.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Yuting Duan, Pinge Zhao, Yuening Deng, Wenting Luo, Zewei Chen, Shujuan Liu, Jinjin Zhou, Ziwen Xu, Binbin Tang, Lin Yu
{"title":"Validity of data extraction in acupuncture meta-analysis: a reproducibility study protocol.","authors":"Yuting Duan, Pinge Zhao, Yuening Deng, Wenting Luo, Zewei Chen, Shujuan Liu, Jinjin Zhou, Ziwen Xu, Binbin Tang, Lin Yu","doi":"10.1136/bmjopen-2024-088736","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis occupy the apex of the evidence pyramid, serving as the most comprehensive and reliable form of evidence-based assessment. Data extraction is a crucial juncture in meta-analysis, establishing the underpinnings for the outcomes and deductions drawn from systematic reviews (SRs). However, the frequency of data extraction errors in meta-analysis is quite significant. Data extraction errors can lead to biased study results, affect the credibility of study results and even mislead clinical practice. The quantity of acupuncture randomised controlled trials and SRs has expanded rapidly recently, yet the validity of data extraction remains unexplored. Hence, our study aims to investigate the validity of data extraction errors in acupuncture SRs, the effect of data extraction errors on results and the relevant guidelines used erroneous results.</p><p><strong>Methods and analysis: </strong>Four databases including MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane linbrary and EMBASE will be searched from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2023 for acupuncture SRs. Two researchers will independently extract data from the meta-analysis and the original study into a standardised data extraction table. A senior investigator, who did not participate in the data extraction process, will verify the results. In cases of discrepancies, the senior researcher will conduct further extraction and consult with another senior researcher to determine the final results. We will analyse the frequency and type of data extraction errors and data estimation errors and evaluate the effect of data extraction errors on results. Quantile regression will be used to explore the factors influencing data extraction error frequency at 25th, 50th and 75th percentiles. Finally, we will further search for guidelines used erroneous results.</p><p><strong>Ethics and dissemination: </strong>Ethical approval is not necessary for this study. This protocol has been registered in Open Science Framework Registries. REGISTRATION DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CHMPA.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11552605/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-088736","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Systematic review and meta-analysis occupy the apex of the evidence pyramid, serving as the most comprehensive and reliable form of evidence-based assessment. Data extraction is a crucial juncture in meta-analysis, establishing the underpinnings for the outcomes and deductions drawn from systematic reviews (SRs). However, the frequency of data extraction errors in meta-analysis is quite significant. Data extraction errors can lead to biased study results, affect the credibility of study results and even mislead clinical practice. The quantity of acupuncture randomised controlled trials and SRs has expanded rapidly recently, yet the validity of data extraction remains unexplored. Hence, our study aims to investigate the validity of data extraction errors in acupuncture SRs, the effect of data extraction errors on results and the relevant guidelines used erroneous results.

Methods and analysis: Four databases including MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane linbrary and EMBASE will be searched from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2023 for acupuncture SRs. Two researchers will independently extract data from the meta-analysis and the original study into a standardised data extraction table. A senior investigator, who did not participate in the data extraction process, will verify the results. In cases of discrepancies, the senior researcher will conduct further extraction and consult with another senior researcher to determine the final results. We will analyse the frequency and type of data extraction errors and data estimation errors and evaluate the effect of data extraction errors on results. Quantile regression will be used to explore the factors influencing data extraction error frequency at 25th, 50th and 75th percentiles. Finally, we will further search for guidelines used erroneous results.

Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not necessary for this study. This protocol has been registered in Open Science Framework Registries. REGISTRATION DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CHMPA.

针灸荟萃分析中数据提取的有效性:可重复性研究方案。
导言:系统综述和荟萃分析是证据金字塔的顶端,是最全面、最可靠的循证评估形式。数据提取是荟萃分析的一个关键环节,它为系统综述(SR)的结果和推论奠定了基础。然而,荟萃分析中数据提取错误的频率相当高。数据提取错误会导致研究结果出现偏差,影响研究结果的可信度,甚至误导临床实践。近年来,针灸随机对照试验和SR的数量迅速增加,但数据提取的有效性仍未得到探讨。因此,我们的研究旨在调查针灸SR中数据提取错误的有效性、数据提取错误对结果的影响以及使用错误结果的相关指南:从 2019 年 1 月 1 日至 2023 年 12 月 31 日,将在 MEDLINE、Web of Science、Cochrane linbrary 和 EMBASE 等四个数据库中检索针灸 SR。两名研究人员将独立从荟萃分析和原始研究中提取数据,并将其纳入标准化数据提取表中。一位未参与数据提取过程的资深研究人员将对结果进行核实。如果出现差异,该资深研究人员将进一步提取数据,并咨询另一位资深研究人员,以确定最终结果。我们将分析数据提取错误和数据估计错误的频率和类型,并评估数据提取错误对结果的影响。我们将使用量子回归法来探讨影响第 25、50 和 75 百分位数数据提取错误频率的因素。最后,我们将进一步寻找使用错误结果的指南:本研究无需伦理批准。本协议已在开放科学框架注册中心注册。registration doi: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CHMPA.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信