Quality of systematic reviews in African emergency medicine: a cross-sectional methodological study
- PMID: 38162895
- PMCID: PMC10757176
- DOI: 10.1016/j.afjem.2023.10.001
Quality of systematic reviews in African emergency medicine: a cross-sectional methodological study
Abstract
Introduction: Reliable systematic reviews are essential to inform clinical practice guidelines, policies and further research priorities in Africa. For systematic review findings to be trustworthy, they need to be conducted with methodological rigour and reported transparently. We assessed the methodological quality of systematic reviews published in African emergency medicine journals, comparing them to those published in international emergency medicine journals. Additionally, we describe the types of review literature published in the African journals.
Methods: We performed a cross-sectional methodological study of systematic reviews published in selected African and international emergency medicine journals from 2012 to 2021. Studies were eligible if they were i) a systematic review on an emergency medicine topic, ii) published in one of the top five emergency medicine journals in the African region or internationally and iii) published between January 2012 and December 2021 in English or French. We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases and hand-searched selected journals. Two authors screened titles, abstracts and full texts independently and in duplicate. Data extraction was performed by one reviewer, using a standardised form, after completing a calibration exercise. We described the characteristics of systematic reviews and assessed methodological quality using AMSTAR II.
Results: We identified 34 (37%) African and 511 (54%) international systematic reviews from 92 and 948 review articles respectively across 10 journals. We included all 34 African and a random sample of 100 international systematic reviews. Methodological quality was low or critically low for all the African systematic reviews (n=34, 100%) and all but three international systematic reviews (n=97, 97%). The median number of critical domain weaknesses was 4 (IQR 4;5) and 2 (IQR 2;4) for African and international systematic reviews respectively. The most common weaknesses across both African and international systematic reviews were i) not establishing a priori review protocols, ii) unclear selection of study designs iii) not providing a list of excluded studies and iv) unclear reporting on funding sources for included studies.
Conclusion: Emergency medicine systematic reviews published in African and international journals are lacking in methodological quality. Reporting an a priori protocol, developing a comprehensive search strategy, appropriate evidence synthesis and adequate assessment of risk of bias, heterogeneity and evidence certainty may improve the quality of systematic reviews.
Keywords: AMSTAR II; Emergency medicine; Methodological quality; Systematic review.
© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of African Federation for Emergency Medicine.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests Michael McCaul (MM) is an editor of the African Journal of Emergency Medicine. MM was not involved in the editorial workflow for this manuscript. The African Journal of Emergency Medicine applies a double-blinded process for all manuscript peer reviews. The authors declared no further conflicts of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
The methodological and reporting characteristics of Campbell reviews: A systematic review.Campbell Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 7;17(1):e1134. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1134. eCollection 2021 Mar. Campbell Syst Rev. 2021. PMID: 37133262 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article.
-
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881. Med J Aust. 2020. PMID: 33314144
-
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12. Early Hum Dev. 2020. PMID: 33036834
-
Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Nov 14;11(11):MR000030. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000030.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012. PMID: 23152285 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- McCaul M., Tovey D., Young T., Welch V., Dewidar O., Goetghebeur M., Kredo T., Tricco AC., Glover RE., Tufte J., et al. Resources supporting trustworthy, rapid and equitable evidence synthesis and guideline development: results from the COVID-19 evidence network to support decision-making (COVID-END) J Clin Epidemiol. 2022;151:88–95. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.07.008. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Mould-Millman NK., Dixon J., Burkholder TW., Sefa N., Patel H., Yaffee AQ., Osisanya A., Oyewumi T., Botchey I., Osei-Ampofo M., et al. Fifteen years of emergency medicine literature in Africa: a scoping review. Afr J Emerg Med. 2019;9(1):45–52. doi: 10.1016/j.afjem.2019.01.006. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources