Assessment for Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in the Field of Hepatology.
A systematic review (SR) provides the best and most objective analysis of the existing evidence in a particular field. SRs and derived conclusions are essential for evidence-based strategies in medicine and evidence-based guidelines in clinical practice. The popularity of SRs has also increased markedly in the field of hepatology. However, although SRs are considered to provide a higher level of evidence with greater confidence than original articles, there have been no reports on the quality of SRs and meta-analyses (MAs) in the field of hepatology. Therefore, we performed a quality assessment of 225 SRs and MAs that were recently published in the field of hepatology (January 2011 to September 2014) using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Using AMSTAR, we revealed both a shortage of assessments of the scientific quality of individual studies and a publication bias in many SRs and MAs. This review addresses the concern that SRs and MAs need to be conducted in a stricter and more objective manner to minimize bias and random errors. Thus, SRs and MAs should be supported by a multidisciplinary approach that includes clinical experts, methodologists, and statisticians.
Department of Nursing, Keimyung University College of Nursing, Daegu, Korea.
Gaeun
G
Kim
Department of Internal Medicine, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Korea.
Youn Zoo
YZ
Cho
Department of Internal Medicine, Wonju Severance Christian Hospital, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Korea.
Soon Koo
SK
Baik
D005762:Gastroenterology; D006801:Humans; D015201:Meta-Analysis as Topic; D017594:Publication Bias; D012196:Review Literature as Topic
Assess the Methodological quality of systematic review; Hepatology; Meta-analysis; Systematic review