Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Systematic reviews (SRs)/Meta-Analyses (Mas) of cost-effectiveness about pregnancy mortality become increasingly popular, which could provide direct decision basis for managers. However, not all SRs/Mas reported the important information, and the SRs/Mas quality is unknown. It is significant to know which information was ignored by reviewers in structured summary in SRs/Mas of cost-effectiveness about pregnancy mortality.
Objectives: To evaluate the reporting quality in SRs/Mas’ abstracts on cost-effectiveness about pregnancy mortality accuracy published.
Methods: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Web of science and PubMed, from 2002 to March 2013. Using the following text and keywords in combination both MeSH terms and text words, the search strategy was (meta analysis OR meta analyses OR systematic review* OR over review) AND pregnancy. Details of the relevant aspects of items as reported in these SRs /MAs were extracted from the abstract structure. Reporting quality was assessed independently by two reviewers using the PRISMA for abstract.
Results: 49 SRs/MAs were included, 40 (81.6%) studies stated the backgrounds. 46 (95%) studies represented research objectives. 39 (79.6%) studies reported data sources.19 (38.8%) studies provided eligibility criteria. 44 (89.8%) studies reported interventions. 40 (81.6%) studies provided participants. 23 (46.9%) studies stated the study appraisal and synthesis methods. 37 (75.5%)studies described results. 19 (38.8%) mentioned limitations.42 (85.7%)studies provided the conclusions and 25 (51%) implications of key findings. 36 (73.5%) studies reported systematic review registration numbers. These reviewswere reported by thirteen Countries, and majority from USA 23 (46.9%).
Conclusions: The reporting quality of SRs/MAs of cost-effectiveness was better in these studies, but authors still should improve reporting quality in field of ‘provided eligibility criteria’, ‘study appraisal and synthesis methods’ and ‘report limitations’ in the SRs/Mas. All countries should increase the studies on cost-effectiveness of pregnancy mortality to improve public health level.
Objectives: To evaluate the reporting quality in SRs/Mas’ abstracts on cost-effectiveness about pregnancy mortality accuracy published.
Methods: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Web of science and PubMed, from 2002 to March 2013. Using the following text and keywords in combination both MeSH terms and text words, the search strategy was (meta analysis OR meta analyses OR systematic review* OR over review) AND pregnancy. Details of the relevant aspects of items as reported in these SRs /MAs were extracted from the abstract structure. Reporting quality was assessed independently by two reviewers using the PRISMA for abstract.
Results: 49 SRs/MAs were included, 40 (81.6%) studies stated the backgrounds. 46 (95%) studies represented research objectives. 39 (79.6%) studies reported data sources.19 (38.8%) studies provided eligibility criteria. 44 (89.8%) studies reported interventions. 40 (81.6%) studies provided participants. 23 (46.9%) studies stated the study appraisal and synthesis methods. 37 (75.5%)studies described results. 19 (38.8%) mentioned limitations.42 (85.7%)studies provided the conclusions and 25 (51%) implications of key findings. 36 (73.5%) studies reported systematic review registration numbers. These reviewswere reported by thirteen Countries, and majority from USA 23 (46.9%).
Conclusions: The reporting quality of SRs/MAs of cost-effectiveness was better in these studies, but authors still should improve reporting quality in field of ‘provided eligibility criteria’, ‘study appraisal and synthesis methods’ and ‘report limitations’ in the SRs/Mas. All countries should increase the studies on cost-effectiveness of pregnancy mortality to improve public health level.