ObjectiveTo overview the systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) of efficacy and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4) in treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).MethodsDatabase including The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI were searched from inception to December 2016 to collect SRs/MAs of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of DPP-4 for the treatment of T2DM. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and evaluated the reporting and methodological qualities using the PRISMA checklist and the AMSTAR tool.ResultsTwenty-seven SRs/MAs of DPP-4 for the treatment of T2DM were included in this overview. The average score of AMSTAR was 7.04. The worst score were the item 1 (26 studies didn't provide an ‘a priori’ design), item 4 (10 studies didn't provide whether the status of publication used as an inclusion criterion?), item 10 and item 11 (15 studies didn't assess the likelihood of publication bias and the potential conflicts of interest). The PRISMA score ranged from 17.0 to 24.5. The main problems of reporting were protocol and registration, search, additional analyses and funding.ConclusionThe evidence shows that the reporting and methodological quality of the SRs/MAs of DPP-4 inhibitors for type 2 diabetes are not high.
Objective To evaluate the relevant systematic reviews/meta-analyses that focused on the prevention and treatment of complications after impacted tooth extraction. Methods The systematic reviews/meta-analyses on the prevention and treatment of complications after impacted tooth extraction were searched in PubMed, The Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data from inception to September 30th, 2012, and a total of 15 professional journals and the references of included studies were also retrieved manually. Two reviewers screened the literature according to the inclusion criteria and extracted the data. Then the AMSTAR was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies, and the GRADE system was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. Results A total of twelve relevant systematic reviews/meta-analyses were included, of which five focused on the prevention and treatment of dry socket, six on the prevention of swelling, seven on the prevention and treatment of pain, six on the prevention of limitation of mouth opening, two on the prevention of infection, three on the prevention of bleeding, and one on the treatment of nerve damage after tooth extraction. Based on AMSTAR, seven studies were minor limitations and five studies were moderate limitations. Based on GRADE system, two was high quality of evidence, twelve were moderate, nine were low, and seven were very low. Conclusion Currently, the systematic reviews/meta-analyses on the prevention and treatment of complications after impacted tooth extraction can provide some references for clinical practice, which should be combined with the real condition by clinical doctors when making an evidence-based decision. However, it also suggests performing more high quality and large sample studies to prove this conclusion.
ObjectiveTo systematically summarize and evaluate the existing evidence of Qishen Yiqi dropping pill (QSYQ) in the treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF), and to evaluate its quality. MethodsThe PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, Web of Science, CNKI, CBM, WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect systematic reviews/meta-analyses(SRs/MAs) related to objectives from inception to December 31, 2022. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality, risk of bias, reporting quality, and quality of evidence of included SRs/MAs by using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2), the Risk of Bias in Systematic(ROBIS) scale, the list of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis(PRISMA), and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. ResultsThis overview included 17 SRs/MAs. The methodological quality, reporting quality, risk of bias, and quality of evidence for outcome measures of SRs/MAs were all unsatisfactory. All SRs/MAs were of low quality according to the results of the AMSTAR-2 assessment. And only a small number of SRs/MAs were assessed as low risk of bias based on the results of the ROBIS assessment. The evaluation results of the PRISMA checklist showed that the report quality of the 24 studies included was relatively complete. According to the GRADE system evaluation results, 94% of the 84 outcome indicators were low-quality and very low-quality evidence. Limitations were the main factors leading to their degradation, followed by publication bias, inconsistency, imprecision and indirectness. ConclusionAt present, QSYQ has good clinical efficacy in the treatment of CHF, but the standardization and scientificity of clinical research and secondary research reports are insufficient, resulting in low quality of clinical recommendations evidence. In the future, it is necessary to further standardize and improve the quality of clinical and secondary research.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the methodological bias and the reliability of the conclusions of systematic reviews (SRs) about traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension.
MethodsWe comprehensively searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane library (Issue 4, 2014), CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data to collect SRs of traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension from the establishment time of databases to April 30th, 2014. The AMSTAR tool was applied for methodological quality assessment of included studies, and the GRADE system was applied for evidence quality assessment of included outcomes of SRs.
ResultsA total of 12 SRs involving 31 outcomes were included, of which 11 SRs focused on the comparison of therapeutic effects between traditional Chinese medicine combined with western medicine and western medicine alone. Nine SRs adopted Jadad tool to assess methodological quality of included original studies. The results of assessment using AMSTAR showed that, among 11 items, there were the most problems concerning Item 1 "Was an 'a prior' design provided?" (none of the 12 SRs provided it); followed by Item 11 "Were potential conflict of interest included?" (nine SRs didn't described it), and Item 6 "Were the characteristics of included studies provided" (six SRs didn't provided it). The results of grading showed that, 29 outcomes were graded as "low" or "very low" quality. The main factors contributed to downgrading evidence quality were limitations (31 outcomes), followed by imprecision (12 outcomes), and inconsistency (13 outcomes).
ConclusionCurrently, the methodological quality of SRs about traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension was poor on the whole, with low quality of evidence as well as lack of enough attention to the end outcomes of patients with essential hypertension. Thus, physicians should apply the evidence to make decision about traditional Chinese medicine for essential hypertension with caution in clinical practice.
ObjectiveTo overview the reporting and methodology quality of systematic reviews/meta-analysis on acupuncture in the treatment of primary osteoporosis (POP).MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, WanFang Data, CNKI and VIP databases were electronically searched to collect systematic reviews/meta-analysis on acupuncture in the treatment of POP from inception to July 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the quality of systematic reviews. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) methodological quality score and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) were used to assess the methodological quality and reporting quality of the systematic reviews, along with the risk of homogeneity and publication bias.ResultsA total of 11 systematic reviews/meta-analysis were included and multiple evaluations of the radar plot showed that the quality average rank scored 7.68. The major problems in studies were lack of items registration, imperfect search strategies and selection bias and so on.ConclusionThe quality of systematic reviews/meta-analysis of acupuncture in the treatment of POP is insufficient, indicating that the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews should be further strengthened.
Objective
To overview the systematic reviews about the efficacy and safety of respiratory fluoroquinolones for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).
Methods
We electronically searched databases including China National Knowledge Internet, WanFang Data, VIP, PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Library to collect systematic reviews or Meta-analyses about respiratory fluoroquinolones for CAP from inception to November 2, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literatures, extracted data, and then AMSTAR tool was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies.
Results
A total of 18 systematic reviews/Meta-analyses were included. The results of quality assessment indicated the scores ranged from 5 to 10. Among the 11 items, the item 1 of " Was an ‘a priori’ design provided” and item 4 " Was the status of publication (i.e. grey literature) used as an inclusion criterion” appeared to be the most problematic. The results of overview suggested that: the efficacy of respiratory fluoroquinolones might be similar to β-lactams plus macrolides combination treatment for CAP. However, respiratory fluoroquinolones might be more safety. In addition, the efficacy of respiratory fluoroquinolones sequential therapy for CAP was similar to that of continuous intravenous therapy, but the adverse reactions of the former were fewer.
Conclusions
Respiratory fluoroquinolones might be similar in efficacy for CAP to other antibiotics recommended by the guidelines with less adverse reactions. However, it can increase multi-drug resistance and potential tuberculosis drug resistance, we should strictly follow the principle of rational use of antibiotics to avoid abuse.
To improve the comprehensive and accurate of overviews of reviews, BMJ published the guideline for overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions: the PRIOR statement. This paper explained the background and core contents of PRIOR statement and interpreted each item with examples to provide references for domestic scholars to write overviews of reviews.
ObjectiveTo overview the systematic reviews on the timing of different surgical interventions for severe multidrug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis patients.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, WanFang Data and CNKI databases were searched for systematic reviews about the timing of different surgical interventions for severe multidrug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis patients from inception to December, 2018. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, evaluated the reporting and methodological qualities using the PRISMA checklist and the AMSTAR tool. After re-extraction of individual RCT data from included systematic reviews, meta-analysis was performed by Stata10.0 software.ResultsA total of 11 systematic reviews were included. The average methodological quality score was 8.13 in AMSTAR , the reporting quality score was from 19.5 to 25 in PRISMA. Re-performed meta-analysis showed that, the total success rate of operation was 93.3% (95%CI 92.9 to 93.8), the failure rate was 3.7% (95%CI 3.3 to 4.0), the mortality rate was 2.0% (95%CI 1.8 to 2.2), and the loss rate was 1.0% (95%CI 0.8 to 1.2). The cure rates of different surgical methods were all over 80%, among which single lobectomy (98.47%) and compound lobectomy (98.94%) had the higher cure rates than others. For the time of different surgical interventions, cure rate could be improved obviously in patients receiving surgery treatment after 1 months (OR=1.58, 95%CI 1.29 to 1.94, P=0.000 12), 1-8months (OR=1.66, 95%CI 1.30 to 2.12, P=0.000 05) and 9-24 months (OR=1.48, 95%CI 1.15 to 1.90, P=0.002) of anti-tuberculosis therapy compared with 0 month.There were significant differences between two groups.ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that operation is an effective way for severe multidrug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis. Operative opportunity should be selected after 1-24 months of anti-tuberculosis drug treatment when the operation time depending on whether the tuberculosis has turned negative or not. Operative mode should be decided by the location and the scope of the lesion, which ensures the maximum excision of lesions and retention of lung function.
ObjectivesTo overview the systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) of effectiveness and safety of spinal manipulation for low back pain or neck pain.
MethodsWe electronically searched databases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2015), CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP to collect SRs/MAs of spinal manipulation for low back pain or neck pain from inception to January 30th, 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and then AMSTAR tool was used to assess the methodological quality of included SRs/MAs.
ResultsA total of 21 SRs/MAs were included. Twenty of them assessed the methodological quality of included original randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with different tools:2 used Jadad scale, 5 used PEDro scale, 6 used Cochrane bias risk assessment tool and 7 used other tools. The assessment results of AMSTAR tool suggested that:among 11 items, the item 1 of "Was an ‘a priori’ design provided" (18 SRs/MAs did not provide) and item 4 of "Was a list of studies (included and excluded) provided" (18 SRs/MAs did not provide) appeared to be the most problematic, followed by item 10 of "Was the likelihood of publication bias assessed" (14 SRs/MAs did not assess the publication bias) and item 11 of "Was the conflict of interest stated" (14 SRs/MAs did not provide the conflict of interest and 4 were incomplete).
ConclusionThe methodological quality of included SRs/MAs is poor. The limited evidence showed that spinal manipulation is more effective for acute low back pain than chronic low back pain, and the short term effect is better than the long term one. Different spinal manipulation techniques have various effects but are all safe. Chiropractic manipulation may have the best effect. Due to the limitation of quality and quantity of included SRs/MAs, there may be potential bias in the above conclusion that needs more high quality studies to verify.
Objective
To overview the systematic review(SR) of efficacy and safety of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) in clostridium difficile infection (CDI).
Methods
PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data databases and related website (http://scholar.google.com/) were electronically searched to collect SR and meta-analysis on FMT of CDI. The quality of collected documents and evidences were evaluated by OQAQ (Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire) and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation), respectively.
Results
Eleven SRs were included, in which 4 were completed by meta-analysis. The results of OQAQ showed that the score of one review was 2, the others SR received scores from 5 to 9. There were 9 SRs had reported the CDI clinical resolution rate (CRR), of which one SR showed CRR was 36.2%, and the others showed CRR were about 90%. Compared to upper gastrointestinal FMT, all studies showed lower gastrointestinal FMT (colonoscopy, enemas, etc.) had a higher CRR. The outcomes of selection and random fecal donor had no significant differences, and authors suggested that there should be made a standardization of donor screening table for safe fecal. Present evidence showed FMT were safety, and the majority of adverse events of FMT appeared to be mild, self-limiting and gastrointestinal in nature. The GRADE quality level of SR indicated from very low to moderate.
Conclusion
FMT, as a treatment for CDI, shows significant efficacy and safety, but need more high-level evidences because of its clinical translation difficulties. The study also give a reference to develop standardized clinical pathways of FMT to policy researchers.
