@Article{biocell.2019.07624,
AUTHOR = {Shuzhen SHI, Ming LIU, Wenjuan MA, Ya GAO, Long GE, Xiping SHEN, Jiarui WU, Junhua ZHANG, Jinhui TIAN},
TITLE = {Retrieval, reporting and methodological characteristics for systematic reviews/meta-analyses of animal models: a meta-epidemiological study},
JOURNAL = {BIOCELL},
VOLUME = {43},
YEAR = {2019},
NUMBER = {4},
PAGES = {233--251},
URL = {http://www.techscience.com/biocell/v43n4/38124},
ISSN = {1667-5746},
ABSTRACT = {The study aimed to analyze the reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews (SRs)/metaanalyses
(MAs) of animal models to provide references for later studies and avoid the waste of medical resources.
EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were searched from inception to November 2017, with no language restriction.
Two reviewers selected inclusion dependently and extracted the basic characteristics. Review Manager 5.3, stata
12.0, and SPSS 21 software were used to conduct analyses. A total of 46 SRs/MAs were included. The results showed
that the English databases with high retrieval frequency are PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science.
67.31% (31/46) of the articles reported the search strategy in the full text or the appendix. 65.22% (30/46) reported
the literature screening flow diagram, and only 19.57% (9/46) reported the number of works of literature retrieved
in each database. 60.87% (28/46) illustrated supplement retrieval. Through 2 subgroup analyses, it was found that
there were no significant differences in the quality of reports of PRISMA items. But referring to the methodological
quality or reporting of PRESS items, SCI was better than that of non-SCI, while there seemed a source of funding
to have no significant impact on the methodological quality or the items of PRESS. The results of PRESS, AMSTAR
2, and PRISMA were correlated, and the correlation between PRISMA and AMSTAR 2 was strong. These results
demonstrated that search strategies of animal model SRs/MAs are still not enough comprehensive, report specification
and methodological quality still need to be ameliorated. To show users the scientificity and rigor of the study, future
research should focus on these various guidelines like PRESS, PRISMA, and AMSTAR 2 checklists that have been
issued, it can help to increase the value of research and improve the utilization of medical resources.
},
DOI = {10.32604/biocell.2019.07624}
}