IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0120911.html

Quality Assessment and Factor Analysis of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Endoscopic Ultrasound Diagnosis

Author

Listed:
  • Danlu Liu
  • Jiaxin Jin
  • Jinhui Tian
  • Kehu Yang

Abstract

Background: Comprehensive monitoring of the quality of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) requires complete and accurate reporting and methodology. Objective: To assess the reporting and methodological quality of SRs/MAs on EUS diagnosis and to explore the potential factors influencing articles’ quality. Methods: The quality of the reporting and methodology was evaluated in relation to the adherence of papers to the PRISMA checklist and the AMSTAR quality scale. The total scores for every criterion and for every article on the two standards were calculated. Data were evaluated and analyzed using SPSS17.0 and RevMan 5.1 in terms of publication time, category of reviews, category of journals, and funding resource. Results: A total of 72 SRs/MAs was included, but no Cochrane Systematic Reviews (CSRs) were obtained. The number of SRs/MAs ranged from 1 in 1998 to 15 in 2013; 88.1% used the QUADAS tool; the average overall scores by PRISMA statement and AMSTAR tool were 19.9 and 5.4, respectively. Scores on some items showed substantial improvement after publication of PRISMA and AMSTAR. However, no reviews followed the criterion of protocol and registration, and only 11.1% of articles fulfilled the criterion of literature search. SRs/MAs from the Science Citation Index (SCI) were of better quality than non-SCI studies. Funding resource made no difference to quality. Regression analysis showed that time of publication and inclusion in the SCI were significantly correlated with total scores on the two standards. Conclusion: The reporting and methodological quality of SRs/MAs on EUS diagnosis has improved measurably since PRISMA and AMSTAR checklists released. It is hoped that CSR in this field will be produced. Literature searching and protocol criteria, as well as QUADAS-2 tool need to be addressed more in the future. Time of publication and SCI relate more to the overall quality of SRs/MAs than does funding resource.

Suggested Citation

  • Danlu Liu & Jiaxin Jin & Jinhui Tian & Kehu Yang, 2015. "Quality Assessment and Factor Analysis of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Endoscopic Ultrasound Diagnosis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0120911
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120911
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0120911
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0120911&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0120911?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nikola Panic & Emanuele Leoncini & Giulio de Belvis & Walter Ricciardi & Stefania Boccia, 2013. "Evaluation of the Endorsement of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Statement on the Quality of Published Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-7, December.
    2. Ivor Popovich & Bethany Windsor & Vanessa Jordan & Marian Showell & Bev Shea & Cynthia M Farquhar, 2012. "Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews in Subfertility: A Comparison of Two Different Approaches," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-9, December.
    3. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    4. Jamie J Kirkham & Doug G Altman & Paula R Williamson, 2010. "Bias Due to Changes in Specified Outcomes during the Systematic Review Process," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(3), pages 1-5, March.
    5. Alessandro Liberati & Douglas G Altman & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Cynthia Mulrow & Peter C Gøtzsche & John P A Ioannidis & Mike Clarke & P J Devereaux & Jos Kleijnen & David Moher, 2009. "The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-28, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dawid Storman & Magdalena Koperny & Joanna Zając & Maciej Polak & Paulina Weglarz & Justyna Bochenek-Cibor & Mateusz J. Swierz & Wojciech Staskiewicz & Magdalena Gorecka & Anna Skuza & Adam A. Wach & , 2022. "Predictors of Higher Quality of Systematic Reviews Addressing Nutrition and Cancer Prevention," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-14, January.
    2. Marko Orošnjak & Branko Štrbac & Srđan Vulanović & Biserka Runje & Amalija Horvatić Novak & Andrej Razumić, 2024. "RCE (rationale–cogency–extent) criterion unravels features affecting citation impact of top-ranked systematic literature reviews: leaving the impression…is all you need," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(3), pages 1891-1947, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giuseppe La Torre & Remigio Bova & Rosario Andrea Cocchiara & Cristina Sestili & Anna Tagliaferri & Simona Maggiacomo & Camilla Foschi & William Zomparelli & Maria Vittoria Manai & David Shaholli & Va, 2023. "What Are the Determinants of the Quality of Systematic Reviews in the International Journals of Occupational Medicine? A Methodological Study Review of Published Literature," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-12, January.
    2. Matthew J Page & Joanne E McKenzie & Patrick M Bossuyt & Isabelle Boutron & Tammy C Hoffmann & Cynthia D Mulrow & Larissa Shamseer & Jennifer M Tetzlaff & Elie A Akl & Sue E Brennan & Roger Chou & Jul, 2021. "The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(3), pages 1-15, March.
    3. repec:plo:pone00:0181927 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Daisuke Kato & Yuki Kataoka & Erfen Gustiawan Suwangto & Makoto Kaneko & Hideki Wakabayashi & Daisuke Son & Ichiro Kawachi, 2020. "Reporting Guidelines for Community-Based Participatory Research Did Not Improve the Reporting Quality of Published Studies: A Systematic Review of Studies on Smoking Cessation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-9, May.
    5. Cocco, Edoardo & Hashimoto, Yuji Z. & Chopin, Julien, 2025. "Child sexual abuse in the catholic church: A scoping review of characteristics, prevalence, and explanatory factors," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    6. Alessandro Concari & Gerjo Kok & Pim Martens, 2020. "A Systematic Literature Review of Concepts and Factors Related to Pro-Environmental Consumer Behaviour in Relation to Waste Management Through an Interdisciplinary Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-50, May.
    7. Arjun K Reddy & Jared T Scott & Grayson R Norris & Chip Moore & Jake X Checketts & Griffin K Hughes & Travis Small & Mark M Calder & Brent L Norris, 2023. "Cemented vs Uncemented hemiarthroplasties for femoral neck fractures: An overlapping systematic review and evidence appraisal," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(2), pages 1-18, February.
    8. Nikolaos Pandis & Padhraig S Fleming & Helen Worthington & Kerry Dwan & Georgia Salanti, 2015. "Discrepancies in Outcome Reporting Exist Between Protocols and Published Oral Health Cochrane Systematic Reviews," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-10, September.
    9. Frank Peinemann & Ulrich Grouven & Nicolaus Kröger & Carmen Bartel & Max H Pittler & Stefan Lange, 2011. "First-Line Matched Related Donor Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Compared to Immunosuppressive Therapy in Acquired Severe Aplastic Anemia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(4), pages 1-16, April.
    10. Jonathan Kingsley & Aisling Bailey & Nooshin Torabi & Pauline Zardo & Suzanne Mavoa & Tonia Gray & Danielle Tracey & Philip Pettitt & Nicholas Zajac & Emily Foenander, 2019. "A Systematic Review Protocol Investigating Community Gardening Impact Measures," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-12, September.
    11. Yam B. Limbu & A. F. M. Jalal Ahamed, 2023. "What Influences Green Cosmetics Purchase Intention and Behavior? A Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-15, August.
    12. repec:plo:pone00:0189091 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. repec:plo:pone00:0012792 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. S. Rajsic & H. Gothe & H. H. Borba & G. Sroczynski & J. Vujicic & T. Toell & Uwe Siebert, 2019. "Economic burden of stroke: a systematic review on post-stroke care," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(1), pages 107-134, February.
    15. Sibonokuhle Ndlovu, 2023. "Preparedness and Response to COVID-19 Disruptions and Learning Challenges for Students with Disabilities in South Africa: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-17, January.
    16. Ogali, Oscar Ikechukwu Okoronkwo & Okoro, Emmanuel Emeka & Sanni, Samuel E. & John, Ikechukwu Theophilus & John, Chukwuemeka Benjamin, 2026. "Advancing z-factor prediction in natural gas systems using machine learning: A review of methods, challenges, and role in the global energy transition," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 226(PB).
    17. Abbas Mardani & Dalia Streimikiene & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Mehrbakhsh Nilashi & Ahmad Jusoh & Habib Zare, 2017. "Application of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to Solve Environmental Sustainability Problems: A Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-65, October.
    18. Luísa Bandeira Lopes & João Albernaz Neves & João Botelho & Vanessa Machado & José João Mendes, 2021. "Regenerative Endodontic Procedures: An Umbrella Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-17, January.
    19. Gaspar, Rui & Yan, Zheng & Domingos, Samuel, 2019. "Extreme natural and man-made events and human adaptive responses mediated by information and communication technologies' use: A systematic literature review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 125-135.
    20. Małgorzata Krzywonos & Zdzisława Romanowska-Duda & Przemysław Seruga & Beata Messyasz & Stanisław Mec, 2023. "The Use of Plants from the Lemnaceae Family for Biofuel Production—A Bibliometric and In-Depth Content Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-24, February.
    21. Nicholas A. Kirk & Nicholas A. Cradock-Henry, 2022. "Land Management Change as Adaptation to Climate and Other Stressors: A Systematic Review of Decision Contexts Using Values-Rules-Knowledge," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-23, May.
    22. Shiqi Lu & Zalik Nuryana & Xiaoyu Ni & Wenbin Xu & Muhammad Nazir Alias, 2025. "A decade of educational robotics: trends and SDG contributions," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    23. Timothy Noblet & John Marriott & Emma Graham-Clarke & Debra Shirley & Alison Rushton, 2018. "Clinical and cost-effectiveness of non-medical prescribing: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-15, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0120911. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.