帕金森氏病治疗系统评价的方法学质量：一项横断面研究

IF 2.9 4区医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY

Neurologia Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.nrl.2023.03.003

Y. Zhang , Y. Lin , C.C.W. Zhong , F.F. Ho , I.X.Y. Wu , C. Mao , X. Yang , V.C.H. Chung

{"title":"帕金森氏病治疗系统评价的方法学质量：一项横断面研究","authors":"Y. Zhang , Y. Lin , C.C.W. Zhong , F.F. Ho , I.X.Y. Wu , C. Mao , X. Yang , V.C.H. Chung","doi":"10.1016/j.nrl.2023.03.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Systematic reviews (SR) of high methodological quality can provide the best evidence for clinical practice. However, the methodological quality of SRs on Parkinson's disease treatments has not been evaluated comprehensively. The study aims to assess the methodological quality of a representative sample of SRs on Parkinson's disease treatments.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Four databases were searched to obtain potentially eligible SRs published between January 2016 and December 2021. A pre-designed questionnaire was used to extract the bibliographical characteristics of the included SRs. The AMSTAR-2 (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) tool was used to assess the methodological quality of SRs. Factors associated with methodological quality were assessed using multivariate regression analyses.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 119 eligible SRs were included and appraised. Only one SR (0.8%) was of high overall methodological quality. Four (3.4%) and 7 (5.9%) SRs were of moderate and low overall methodological quality, respectively. Among the appraised SRs, only 3 (2.5%) applied a comprehensive literature search strategy, 11 (9.2%) provided a list of excluded studies with justifications for exclusion, and 4 (3.4%) reported the sources of funding among the original studies included in the SR. Cochrane SRs and SRs published in journals with higher impact factors had relatively higher overall methodological quality.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This study demonstrated that SRs on Parkinson's disease treatments are of low methodological quality. To enhance the quality and hence the trustworthiness of SRs, the protocols of future reviews should be designed and registered a priori, and researchers should conduct a comprehensive literature search, provide a list of excluded studies with justifications for exclusion, and report sources of funding for the included original studies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19300,"journal":{"name":"Neurologia","volume":"40 6","pages":"Pages 507-517"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methodological quality of systematic reviews on treatments for Parkinson's disease: A cross-sectional study\",\"authors\":\"Y. Zhang , Y. Lin , C.C.W. Zhong , F.F. Ho , I.X.Y. Wu , C. Mao , X. Yang , V.C.H. Chung\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.nrl.2023.03.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Systematic reviews (SR) of high methodological quality can provide the best evidence for clinical practice. However, the methodological quality of SRs on Parkinson's disease treatments has not been evaluated comprehensively. The study aims to assess the methodological quality of a representative sample of SRs on Parkinson's disease treatments.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Four databases were searched to obtain potentially eligible SRs published between January 2016 and December 2021. A pre-designed questionnaire was used to extract the bibliographical characteristics of the included SRs. The AMSTAR-2 (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) tool was used to assess the methodological quality of SRs. Factors associated with methodological quality were assessed using multivariate regression analyses.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 119 eligible SRs were included and appraised. Only one SR (0.8%) was of high overall methodological quality. Four (3.4%) and 7 (5.9%) SRs were of moderate and low overall methodological quality, respectively. Among the appraised SRs, only 3 (2.5%) applied a comprehensive literature search strategy, 11 (9.2%) provided a list of excluded studies with justifications for exclusion, and 4 (3.4%) reported the sources of funding among the original studies included in the SR. Cochrane SRs and SRs published in journals with higher impact factors had relatively higher overall methodological quality.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This study demonstrated that SRs on Parkinson's disease treatments are of low methodological quality. To enhance the quality and hence the trustworthiness of SRs, the protocols of future reviews should be designed and registered a priori, and researchers should conduct a comprehensive literature search, provide a list of excluded studies with justifications for exclusion, and report sources of funding for the included original studies.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurologia\",\"volume\":\"40 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages 507-517\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0213485324001051\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurologia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0213485324001051","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

高方法学质量的系统评价（SR）可以为临床实践提供最好的证据。然而，关于帕金森病治疗的SRs的方法学质量尚未得到全面评价。该研究旨在评估帕金森病治疗中具有代表性的SRs样本的方法学质量。方法检索4个数据库，获取2016年1月至2021年12月间发表的潜在符合标准的SRs。采用预先设计的调查问卷提取纳入的特殊文献的文献特征。AMSTAR-2（评估系统评价的方法学质量）工具用于评估SRs的方法学质量。采用多变量回归分析评估与方法学质量相关的因素。结果共纳入并评价了119例符合条件的SRs。只有一个SR（0.8%）总体方法学质量较高。4个（3.4%）和7个（5.9%）的SRs分别为中等和低总体方法学质量。在评价的SRs中，只有3篇（2.5%）采用了全面的文献检索策略，11篇（9.2%）提供了排除研究的清单并给出了排除的理由，4篇（3.4%）报告了纳入SRs的原始研究的资金来源。Cochrane SRs和发表在影响因子较高的期刊上的SRs总体方法学质量相对较高。结论本研究表明帕金森病治疗的SRs方法质量较低。为了提高SRs的质量和可信度，未来综述的方案应预先设计和注册，研究人员应进行全面的文献检索，提供排除研究的清单和排除的理由，并报告被排除的原始研究的资金来源。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Methodological quality of systematic reviews on treatments for Parkinson's disease: A cross-sectional study

Background

Systematic reviews (SR) of high methodological quality can provide the best evidence for clinical practice. However, the methodological quality of SRs on Parkinson's disease treatments has not been evaluated comprehensively. The study aims to assess the methodological quality of a representative sample of SRs on Parkinson's disease treatments.

Methods

Four databases were searched to obtain potentially eligible SRs published between January 2016 and December 2021. A pre-designed questionnaire was used to extract the bibliographical characteristics of the included SRs. The AMSTAR-2 (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) tool was used to assess the methodological quality of SRs. Factors associated with methodological quality were assessed using multivariate regression analyses.

Results

A total of 119 eligible SRs were included and appraised. Only one SR (0.8%) was of high overall methodological quality. Four (3.4%) and 7 (5.9%) SRs were of moderate and low overall methodological quality, respectively. Among the appraised SRs, only 3 (2.5%) applied a comprehensive literature search strategy, 11 (9.2%) provided a list of excluded studies with justifications for exclusion, and 4 (3.4%) reported the sources of funding among the original studies included in the SR. Cochrane SRs and SRs published in journals with higher impact factors had relatively higher overall methodological quality.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that SRs on Parkinson's disease treatments are of low methodological quality. To enhance the quality and hence the trustworthiness of SRs, the protocols of future reviews should be designed and registered a priori, and researchers should conduct a comprehensive literature search, provide a list of excluded studies with justifications for exclusion, and report sources of funding for the included original studies.

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

Neurologia 医学-临床神经学

CiteScore

5.90

自引率

2.60%

发文量

135

审稿时长

48 days

期刊介绍： Neurología es la revista oficial de la Sociedad Española de Neurología y publica, desde 1986 contribuciones científicas en el campo de la neurología clínica y experimental. Los contenidos de Neurología abarcan desde la neuroepidemiología, la clínica neurológica, la gestión y asistencia neurológica y la terapéutica, a la investigación básica en neurociencias aplicada a la neurología. Las áreas temáticas de la revistas incluyen la neurologia infantil, la neuropsicología, la neurorehabilitación y la neurogeriatría. Los artículos publicados en Neurología siguen un proceso de revisión por doble ciego a fin de que los trabajos sean seleccionados atendiendo a su calidad, originalidad e interés y así estén sometidos a un proceso de mejora. El formato de artículos incluye Editoriales, Originales, Revisiones y Cartas al Editor, Neurología es el vehículo de información científica de reconocida calidad en profesionales interesados en la neurología que utilizan el español, como demuestra su inclusión en los más prestigiosos y selectivos índices bibliográficos del mundo.