关于遵守慢性下肢外周动脉疾病血管内治疗报告标准的文献计量分析。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Neal Modi , Zachary Timmer , Aberdeen Taylor , Saideep Bose , Angela Spencer , Matthew R. Smeds
{"title":"关于遵守慢性下肢外周动脉疾病血管内治疗报告标准的文献计量分析。","authors":"Neal Modi ,&nbsp;Zachary Timmer ,&nbsp;Aberdeen Taylor ,&nbsp;Saideep Bose ,&nbsp;Angela Spencer ,&nbsp;Matthew R. Smeds","doi":"10.1016/j.avsg.2024.06.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) involves a broad spectrum of therapies including many new and emerging techniques. To standardize the results of studies examining this pathology and to allow critical analysis and comparison between studies, the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) recommended reporting standard guidelines for the endovascular management of CLTI in 2016. Research studies that do not adhere to complete reporting standards are often more ambiguous in impact and external validity, leading to bias and misinformation that has potentially damaging effects on clinical decision-making. We thus sought to examine adherence to and factors associated with noncompliance with these recommended guidelines.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A literature database search was conducted to include all clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, and retrospective comparative studies written in English examining the endovascular treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD)/CLTI from January 2020 to August 2022. Systematic reviews, case reports, and meta-analysis were excluded. The manuscripts were reviewed for adherence with the SVS guidelines (overall and by guideline subcategories based on demographics, treatment methods, and outcomes), and factors associated with this adherence were determined. These data were used to calculate descriptive and comparative statistics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Fifty-four manuscripts were identified from this time frame. On average, articles reviewed reported on 42.0% of the SVS reporting standards (range, 25.0–65.2%, Fig 1) with 74.1% of articles (<em>n</em> = 40) not adhering to at least 50.0% of the standards. Manuscripts most completely followed guidelines regarding “patient factors” and were least likely to demonstrate adherence to the description of CLTI and study complications. Within the guideline subcategories, complete adherence to guidelines was not demonstrated in any manuscript in stent trials, disease outcome measures, technical outcome measures, patient factors and critical limb ischemia description, and complete adherence rates within the other subcategories was low (range, 5.6–18.6%). Studies conducted within the United States and those with industry sponsorship were more likely to adhere to &gt;50% of the reporting standards (<em>P</em> &lt; 0.05). Journal impact factor, year of publication, and number of authors had no correlation to the percent adherence to guidelines in specific categories or adherence overall.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Adherence to reporting standard guidelines for endovascular treatment of lower extremity PAD specifically outlined by the SVS is suboptimal regardless of the quality of the journal the research is published in. Increasing adherence to reporting standards to provide a framework for comparison of studies across techniques used should be prioritized by authors, journal editors, and vascular societies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8061,"journal":{"name":"Annals of vascular surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Bibliometric Analysis on Adherence to Reporting Standards for Endovascular Treatment of Chronic Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease\",\"authors\":\"Neal Modi ,&nbsp;Zachary Timmer ,&nbsp;Aberdeen Taylor ,&nbsp;Saideep Bose ,&nbsp;Angela Spencer ,&nbsp;Matthew R. Smeds\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.avsg.2024.06.013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) involves a broad spectrum of therapies including many new and emerging techniques. To standardize the results of studies examining this pathology and to allow critical analysis and comparison between studies, the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) recommended reporting standard guidelines for the endovascular management of CLTI in 2016. Research studies that do not adhere to complete reporting standards are often more ambiguous in impact and external validity, leading to bias and misinformation that has potentially damaging effects on clinical decision-making. We thus sought to examine adherence to and factors associated with noncompliance with these recommended guidelines.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A literature database search was conducted to include all clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, and retrospective comparative studies written in English examining the endovascular treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD)/CLTI from January 2020 to August 2022. Systematic reviews, case reports, and meta-analysis were excluded. The manuscripts were reviewed for adherence with the SVS guidelines (overall and by guideline subcategories based on demographics, treatment methods, and outcomes), and factors associated with this adherence were determined. These data were used to calculate descriptive and comparative statistics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Fifty-four manuscripts were identified from this time frame. On average, articles reviewed reported on 42.0% of the SVS reporting standards (range, 25.0–65.2%, Fig 1) with 74.1% of articles (<em>n</em> = 40) not adhering to at least 50.0% of the standards. Manuscripts most completely followed guidelines regarding “patient factors” and were least likely to demonstrate adherence to the description of CLTI and study complications. Within the guideline subcategories, complete adherence to guidelines was not demonstrated in any manuscript in stent trials, disease outcome measures, technical outcome measures, patient factors and critical limb ischemia description, and complete adherence rates within the other subcategories was low (range, 5.6–18.6%). Studies conducted within the United States and those with industry sponsorship were more likely to adhere to &gt;50% of the reporting standards (<em>P</em> &lt; 0.05). Journal impact factor, year of publication, and number of authors had no correlation to the percent adherence to guidelines in specific categories or adherence overall.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Adherence to reporting standard guidelines for endovascular treatment of lower extremity PAD specifically outlined by the SVS is suboptimal regardless of the quality of the journal the research is published in. Increasing adherence to reporting standards to provide a framework for comparison of studies across techniques used should be prioritized by authors, journal editors, and vascular societies.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of vascular surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of vascular surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890509624004242\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of vascular surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890509624004242","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:慢性肢体威胁性缺血(CLTI)的治疗涉及广泛的治疗方法,包括许多新兴技术。为了使研究该病理的结果标准化,并对不同研究进行批判性分析和比较,血管外科学会于 2016 年推荐了 CLTI 血管内治疗的报告标准指南。未遵守完整报告标准的研究往往在影响和外部有效性方面较为模糊,从而导致偏差和误导,对临床决策产生潜在的破坏性影响。因此,我们试图研究这些推荐指南的遵守情况以及与不遵守指南相关的因素:通过文献数据库检索,纳入了 2020 年 1 月至 2022 年 8 月期间所有用英语撰写的、研究 PAD/CLTI 血管内治疗的临床试验、随机对照试验和回顾性比较研究。不包括系统综述、病例报告和荟萃分析。对稿件是否符合 SVS 指南(总体指南和基于人口统计学、治疗方法和结果的指南子类别)进行了审查,并确定了与是否符合指南相关的因素。这些数据用于计算描述性和比较性统计数据:结果:在这段时间内,共确定了 54 篇手稿。经审查的文章平均报告了42.0%的SVS报告标准(范围为25.0-65.2%,图1),74.1%的文章(n=40)没有遵守至少50.0%的标准。稿件最完全地遵循了有关 "患者因素 "的指南,而最不可能遵循有关CLTI和研究并发症的描述。在指南子类别中,支架试验、疾病结果测量、技术结果测量、患者因素和临界肢体缺血描述方面没有任何稿件完全遵守指南,其他子类别的完全遵守率较低(范围为5.6%-18.6%)。在美国境内进行的研究和有行业赞助的研究更有可能遵守>50%的报告标准(P结论:无论研究发表在何种质量的期刊上,对SVS特别提出的下肢PAD血管内治疗报告标准指南的遵守情况都不理想。作者、期刊编辑和血管学会应优先考虑加强对报告标准的遵守,以便为比较不同技术的研究提供框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Bibliometric Analysis on Adherence to Reporting Standards for Endovascular Treatment of Chronic Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease

Background

The treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) involves a broad spectrum of therapies including many new and emerging techniques. To standardize the results of studies examining this pathology and to allow critical analysis and comparison between studies, the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) recommended reporting standard guidelines for the endovascular management of CLTI in 2016. Research studies that do not adhere to complete reporting standards are often more ambiguous in impact and external validity, leading to bias and misinformation that has potentially damaging effects on clinical decision-making. We thus sought to examine adherence to and factors associated with noncompliance with these recommended guidelines.

Methods

A literature database search was conducted to include all clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, and retrospective comparative studies written in English examining the endovascular treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD)/CLTI from January 2020 to August 2022. Systematic reviews, case reports, and meta-analysis were excluded. The manuscripts were reviewed for adherence with the SVS guidelines (overall and by guideline subcategories based on demographics, treatment methods, and outcomes), and factors associated with this adherence were determined. These data were used to calculate descriptive and comparative statistics.

Results

Fifty-four manuscripts were identified from this time frame. On average, articles reviewed reported on 42.0% of the SVS reporting standards (range, 25.0–65.2%, Fig 1) with 74.1% of articles (n = 40) not adhering to at least 50.0% of the standards. Manuscripts most completely followed guidelines regarding “patient factors” and were least likely to demonstrate adherence to the description of CLTI and study complications. Within the guideline subcategories, complete adherence to guidelines was not demonstrated in any manuscript in stent trials, disease outcome measures, technical outcome measures, patient factors and critical limb ischemia description, and complete adherence rates within the other subcategories was low (range, 5.6–18.6%). Studies conducted within the United States and those with industry sponsorship were more likely to adhere to >50% of the reporting standards (P < 0.05). Journal impact factor, year of publication, and number of authors had no correlation to the percent adherence to guidelines in specific categories or adherence overall.

Conclusions

Adherence to reporting standard guidelines for endovascular treatment of lower extremity PAD specifically outlined by the SVS is suboptimal regardless of the quality of the journal the research is published in. Increasing adherence to reporting standards to provide a framework for comparison of studies across techniques used should be prioritized by authors, journal editors, and vascular societies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
13.30%
发文量
603
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: Annals of Vascular Surgery, published eight times a year, invites original manuscripts reporting clinical and experimental work in vascular surgery for peer review. Articles may be submitted for the following sections of the journal: Clinical Research (reports of clinical series, new drug or medical device trials) Basic Science Research (new investigations, experimental work) Case Reports (reports on a limited series of patients) General Reviews (scholarly review of the existing literature on a relevant topic) Developments in Endovascular and Endoscopic Surgery Selected Techniques (technical maneuvers) Historical Notes (interesting vignettes from the early days of vascular surgery) Editorials/Correspondence
×
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