Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in articles hand and wrist pathology: a review
**Background**: An increasing number of systematic reviews are published on an annual basis. Although perusal of the full text of articles is preferable, abstracts are sometimes relied upon to guide clinical decisions. Despite this, the abstracts of systematic reviews have historically been poorly r...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Australian Society of Plastic Surgeons
2019-09-01
|
| Series: | Australasian Journal of Plastic Surgery |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.34239/ajops.v2n2.141 |
| _version_ | 1797201248503463936 |
|---|---|
| author | Amanda Yang Shen Robert S Ware Tom J O'Donohoe Jason Wasiak |
| author_facet | Amanda Yang Shen Robert S Ware Tom J O'Donohoe Jason Wasiak |
| author_sort | Amanda Yang Shen |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | **Background**: An increasing number of systematic reviews are published on an annual basis. Although perusal of the full text of articles is preferable, abstracts are sometimes relied upon to guide clinical decisions. Despite this, the abstracts of systematic reviews have historically been poorly reported. We evaluated the reporting quality of systematic review abstracts within hand and wrist pathology literature.
**Methods**: We searched MEDLINE®, EMBASE and Cochrane Library from inception to December 2017 for systematic reviews relating to hand and wrist pathology. The 12-item PRISMA-A checklist was used to assess abstract reporting quality.
**Results**: A total of 114 abstracts were included. Most related to fracture (38%) or arthritis (17%) management. Forty-seven systematic reviews (41%) included meta-analysis. Mean PRISMA-A score was 3.6/12 with Cochrane reviews having the highest mean score and hand-specific journals having the lowest. Abstracts longer than 300 words (mean difference [MD]: 1.43, 95% CI [0.74, 2.13]; p <0.001) and systematic reviews with meta-analysis (MD: 0.64, 95% CI [0.05, 1.22]; p=0.034) were associated with higher scores. Unstructured abstracts were associated with lower scores (MD: –0.65, 95% CI [–1.28, –0.02]; p=0.044). A limitation of this study is the possible exclusion of relevant studies that were not published in the English language.
**Conclusion**: Abstracts of systematic reviews pertaining to hand and wrist pathology have been suboptimally reported as assessed by the PRISMA-A checklist. Improvements in reporting quality could be achieved by endorsement of PRISMA-A guidelines by authors and journals, and reducing constraints on abstract length. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-08T14:44:55Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5a51834cde37442eb33b1907f2c4a88d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2209-170X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-24T07:44:32Z |
| publishDate | 2019-09-01 |
| publisher | Australian Society of Plastic Surgeons |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Australasian Journal of Plastic Surgery |
| spelling | doaj.art-5a51834cde37442eb33b1907f2c4a88d2024-04-19T04:19:17ZengAustralian Society of Plastic SurgeonsAustralasian Journal of Plastic Surgery2209-170X2019-09-0122Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in articles hand and wrist pathology: a reviewAmanda Yang ShenRobert S WareTom J O'DonohoeJason Wasiak**Background**: An increasing number of systematic reviews are published on an annual basis. Although perusal of the full text of articles is preferable, abstracts are sometimes relied upon to guide clinical decisions. Despite this, the abstracts of systematic reviews have historically been poorly reported. We evaluated the reporting quality of systematic review abstracts within hand and wrist pathology literature. **Methods**: We searched MEDLINE®, EMBASE and Cochrane Library from inception to December 2017 for systematic reviews relating to hand and wrist pathology. The 12-item PRISMA-A checklist was used to assess abstract reporting quality. **Results**: A total of 114 abstracts were included. Most related to fracture (38%) or arthritis (17%) management. Forty-seven systematic reviews (41%) included meta-analysis. Mean PRISMA-A score was 3.6/12 with Cochrane reviews having the highest mean score and hand-specific journals having the lowest. Abstracts longer than 300 words (mean difference [MD]: 1.43, 95% CI [0.74, 2.13]; p <0.001) and systematic reviews with meta-analysis (MD: 0.64, 95% CI [0.05, 1.22]; p=0.034) were associated with higher scores. Unstructured abstracts were associated with lower scores (MD: –0.65, 95% CI [–1.28, –0.02]; p=0.044). A limitation of this study is the possible exclusion of relevant studies that were not published in the English language. **Conclusion**: Abstracts of systematic reviews pertaining to hand and wrist pathology have been suboptimally reported as assessed by the PRISMA-A checklist. Improvements in reporting quality could be achieved by endorsement of PRISMA-A guidelines by authors and journals, and reducing constraints on abstract length.https://doi.org/10.34239/ajops.v2n2.141 |
| spellingShingle | Amanda Yang Shen Robert S Ware Tom J O'Donohoe Jason Wasiak Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in articles hand and wrist pathology: a review Australasian Journal of Plastic Surgery |
| title | Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in articles hand and wrist pathology: a review |
| title_full | Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in articles hand and wrist pathology: a review |
| title_fullStr | Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in articles hand and wrist pathology: a review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in articles hand and wrist pathology: a review |
| title_short | Reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in articles hand and wrist pathology: a review |
| title_sort | reporting quality of systematic review abstracts in articles hand and wrist pathology a review |
| url | https://doi.org/10.34239/ajops.v2n2.141 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT amandayangshen reportingqualityofsystematicreviewabstractsinarticleshandandwristpathologyareview AT robertsware reportingqualityofsystematicreviewabstractsinarticleshandandwristpathologyareview AT tomjodonohoe reportingqualityofsystematicreviewabstractsinarticleshandandwristpathologyareview AT jasonwasiak reportingqualityofsystematicreviewabstractsinarticleshandandwristpathologyareview |