Methodological and reporting quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the association between sleep duration and hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: It is crucial to conduct systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) to make causal references, in order to inform the clinical guidelines and decision-making. The high reporting quality of reviews through compliance with the guidelines Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) could promote the consistency and reproducibility across the published articles. The purpose of this meta-epidemiological study is to evaluate the reporting methodological quality of SRs on the association between sleep duration and hypertension. METHODS: An electronic search in an online database was performed to retrieve systematic reviews and meta-analyses published up to 31st December 2022. Data screening and extraction were conducted by two investigators. The reporting quality of each included article was measured with reference to the 27-item 2020 PRISMA checklist, and methodological quality was evaluated using the AMSTAR-2. PRISMA evaluation was determined by total scores of individual SR and items scores and AMSTAR-2 assessment was also conducted using four categories. RESULTS: Of 2269 articles captured in the initial search, 15 SRs were included in the final analyses. All SRs had more than one incomplete PRISMA item. The mean of total scores was 20.5 (range 14-25), and the results of the AMSTAR-2 assessment were critically low to low. The reporting quality of "rationale," "objectives," "selection process," "study selection," "discussion," and 'support' was fully reported. SRs that reported registration information and protocol had a higher PRISMA score than articles that reported certain deficiencies. From the results of the AMSTAR-2 assessment, the methodological quality of these SRs and MAs was critically low to low. None of the included literature provided a list of excluded articles, and the report of the search strategy was incomplete; half of the SRs did not use appropriate tools to assess the risk of bias in each included study. CONCLUSIONS: Both the reporting and methodological quality of overall studies are less than ideal, with several key items being consistently under-reported. The quality measured by AMSTAR-2 is mainly consistent with the quality of reporting. Authors, reviewers, and journal editors should raise awareness and move forward to encourage completeness of SR reporting based on the results, which can aid in enhancing the quality of evidence. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023459901.

The association between air pollution and obesity: an umbrella review of meta-analyses and systematic reviews.

The objective of this umbrella review was to investigate comprehensive and synthesized evidence of the association between ambient air pollution and obesity based on the current systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Related studies from databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, published before July 16, 2023, were considered in the analysis. All selected systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The risk of bias and the methodological quality were evaluated using the AMSTAR 2 tool. The protocol for this umbrella review was documented in PROSPERO with the registration number: CRD42023450191. This umbrella review identified 7 studies, including 5 meta-analyses and 2 systematic reviews, to assess the impacts of air pollutants on obesity. Commonly examined air pollutants included PM1, PM2.5, PM10, NO2, SO2, O3. Most of the included studies presented that air pollution exposure was positively associated with the increased risk of obesity. The impact of air pollution on obesity varied by different ambient air pollutants. This study provided compelling evidence that exposure to air pollution had a positive association with the risk of obesity. These findings further indicate the importance of strengthening air pollution prevention and control. Future studies should elucidate the possible mechanisms and pathways linking air pollution to obesity.

Laparoscopic Surgery During Pregnancy: A Meta-Review and Quality Analysis Using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 Instrument.

Accumulation of experience with minimally invasive surgery over the last three decades has rendered laparoscopic surgery the mainstay of management for surgical pathology during pregnancy. In the present meta-review, we compiled the available evidence on the safety of laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgeries during pregnancy, based on relevant systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA). A systematic review was performed for articles published until February 2024 in English using PubMed/MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online) and Google Scholar based on predefined selection and exclusion criteria. We implemented the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and included SRs and MAs examining women of childbearing age (population) who had undergone laparoscopic surgery or robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy (intervention). The presence of comparison to open surgery was desirable but not mandatory (comparator). The included studies should necessarily report on fetal loss (outcome), and optionally on other metrics of fetal, maternal, or operative performance. We considered SRs/MAs analyzing randomized trials, observational studies, case reports, and case series (study design). The methodological quality of SRs/MAs not exclusively including case reports and case series was assessed with the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 instrument. A total of 1229 articles were screened, of which 78 were potentially eligible. Of these, 33 articles met our inclusion criteria, 18 containing SRs only and 15 SRs with MA. The examined disciplines were laparoscopic appendectomy (10 studies, 30.3%), laparoscopic cerclage for cervical insufficiency (eight studies, 24.2%), adnexal-ovarian laparoscopic surgery (five studies, 15.2%), laparoscopic cholecystectomy and biliary tree exploration (three studies, 9.1%), laparoscopic myomectomy (two studies, 6.1%), and one study each for laparoscopic surgery regarding pancreatic indications, adrenal indications, and bariatric complications (3.0%). The odds ratio/relative risk for fetal loss rate ranged from 0-1.9, with variable statistical significance depending on the discipline. Twenty-three out of the 33 studies were submitted to quality evaluation with the AMSTAR 2 instrument, with three being of "low quality" (13.0%) and the remaining 20 of "critically low quality" (87.0%). In conclusion, the widespread acceptance of laparoscopic surgery for treating surgical pathology during pregnancy is substantiated by heterogeneous and low-quality evidence. Literature mainly revolves around laparoscopic appendectomy, whereas other disciplines that may commonly arise during pregnancy, such as cholecystectomy and the acute abdomen following bariatric surgery, are underrepresented in the literature. Factors such as anatomical alterations that may affect surgical access, surgeon's expertise, and the biological course of the underlying pathology should be taken into consideration when selecting the appropriate mode of operating during pregnancy.

[Evidence mapping of traditional Chinese medicine intervention in diabetic retinopathy].

This study aims to assess the quality of evidence for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy with traditional Chinese medicine based on the systematic reviews/Meta-analyses of relevant studies. CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Web of Science, EMbase, and Cochrane Library were searched for the systematic reviews/Meta-analyses of traditional Chinese medicine interventions in diabetic retinopathy published from the inception to November 2023. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2(AMSTAR2) scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. An evidence map was built to present the information on intervention measures, the number of studies included in the systematic reviews/Meta-analyses, research conclusions, and methodological quality assessment results. A total of 51 studies were included. Traditional Chinese medicine interventions accounted for a large proportion of the intervention measures, followed by Chinese patent medicines. The treatment methods mainly included tonifying deficiency, activating blood, and resolving stasis. According to the AMSTAR2 scale assessment results, the descriptions of funding information for included studies, lists of excluded articles, and preliminary research protocols were particularly lacking. The evidence map showed that 48, 2, and 1 studies concluded with beneficial effects, possible beneficial effects, and unclear effects, respectively. On the whole, traditional Chinese medicine demonstrated definite efficacy in the treatment of diabetic retinopathy, while the evidence pre-sents moderate to low quality. It is suggested that higher-quality studies remain to be carried out to provide more evidence.

Evaluation of traditional Chinese exercise for knee osteoarthritis (KOA): an overview of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) has become a public health issue. Several systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) indicate that traditional Chinese exercise (TCE) may be an effective treatment for reducing pain and stiffness and improving physical function in people with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the literature quality and evidence for the systematic reviews of TCE for KOA and provide evidence to support the clinical application of TCE for KOA. METHODS: Eight databases were searched from their inception to January 3, 2023, to retrieve relevant literature, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP), China Biology Medical literature database (CBM), PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, without restrictions on publication date or language. AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA 2020 assessed the methodological and reporting quality of included SRs/MAs. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was utilized to evaluate the quality of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 18 SRs/MAs were included. The methodological quality was "very low" based on AMSTAR-2. The overall reporting quality was deficient based on PRISMA 2020. The quality of Chinese and English literature differed, with English literature being superior in methodological and reporting quality. Among 93 pieces of evidence obtained, 46 (49.46%) were of very low quality, 34 (36.56%) were of low quality, 13 (13.98%) were of moderate quality, and none were of high quality. TCE was supported by 76 pieces of evidence (81.72%). CONCLUSION: TCE appears beneficial and safe for managing KOA. However, due to the relatively low methodological and evidentiary quality of included SRs/MAs, clinicians should interpret these findings cautiously.

The efficacy of acupuncture for trigeminal neuralgia: an overview of systematic reviews.

Background: Many systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analysis (MAs) have reported the efficacy of acupuncture treatment for primary trigeminal neuralgia (PTN), but the quality of evidence is unknown and therefore needs to be evaluated comprehensively. Methods: Eight electronic databases were searched from their inception until January 5, 2024. The methodological quality, reporting quality, and risk of bias of the included SRs were assessed by the assessment of multiple systematic reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2), the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The quality of evidence for outcome measures was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Results: We identified 13 SRs/MAs met inclusion criteria. According to the results of the AMSTAR-2, six were rated as critically low quality and seven as low quality. According to ROBIS assessment, 8 SRs/MAs were classified as low risk, and 5 SRs/MAs were found to be high risk. The PRISMA report still has some reporting deficiencies in aspects such as protocol and registration, search strategy, risk of bias, additional analyzes and funding. According to the GRADE system, no high-quality evidence was found, 1 was of moderate quality, 4 were of low quality, and 8 were of critical low quality. Conclusion: Based on the evidence collected, acupuncture shows promise as a treatment for PTN patients. However, it is important to note that the included SRs/MAs generally have low methodological quality and evidence quality. Therefore, caution must be exercised when interpreting this conclusion. To enhance future research in this area, it is recommended to adequately report methodological details and adhere to guidelines for conducting SRs/MAs.Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024499280.

A methodological and reporting quality assessment of systematic reviews/meta-analyses on exercise interventions for cognitive function in older adults with mild cognitive impairment.

Objective: To assess the methodological quality of meta-analytic literature on exercise interventions for cognitive function in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and the certainty of evidence for its outcome indicators, and to provide clinicians and researchers with more reliable data for making decisions. Methods: Meta-analytic literature related to the effect of exercise intervention on cognitive function in patients with mild cognitive impairment was searched through PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Web of Science, all with a search period frame of each database until June 1, 2024. The AMSTAR2 scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. Results: Seventeen meta-analyses were included. The AMSTAR2 scale evaluation results showed that there was one medium-quality studies (5.55%), seven low-quality studies (38.88%), and 10 very low-quality studies (55.55%). Methodological deficiencies included failure to prepare a plan and provide a registration number, literature screening, data extraction, reasons for exclusion not described in detail, poor implementation process for systematic evaluation, and failure to describe the source of funding for the included studies or relevant conflicts of interest. Conclusion: The overall methodological quality of the meta-analytic literature is low, and the certainty of evidence is low. We encourage the conduction of high-quality randomized trials to generate stronger evidence. Subsequent systematic reviews can then synthesize this evidence to inform future research and clinical guidelines.

Evaluation of Aligners and Root Resorption: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

Background: To evaluate the current evidence on clear aligners and root resorption using 3D and/or combined 2D and 3D methods from available systematic reviews and meta-analyses and to determine the relationship between root resorption and clear aligners using the AMSTAR 2 tool. Methods: A comprehensive literature search of systematic reviews investigating aligners and root resorption, published up until 31 December 2022, was conducted. The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Science Direct, Web of Science, Scopus, LIVIVO, and LILACS. There were no language restrictions. The inclusion criteria were restricted to studies focusing on root resorption utilizing either 3D methods exclusively or a combination of 2D and 3D techniques. Data were screened and analyzed for quality using the "A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2)" tool. Data extraction was conducted independently by two authors. The gathered information was categorized and synthesized narratively based on the primary findings elucidated within the reviews. Results: Out of a total of 1221 potentially eligible studies initially identified, 4 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria following the exclusion of irrelevant studies. Among these, two systematic reviews (50%) were classified as low-quality, while the remaining two (50%) were deemed to be of critically low quality. Conclusions: Based on the findings of four systematic reviews, the root resorption rate was lower with the use of clear aligners than with fixed aligners. It is advisable to approach the interpretation of this conclusion with caution, as the quality of the available evidence is assessed to be very low. Higher quality systematic reviews are needed to substantiate this conclusion.

Efficacy and safety of ozone therapy for knee osteoarthritis: an umbrella review of systematic reviews.

The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ozone therapy (OT) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA), which is the most common form of the disease. We analysed systematic reviews (SRs) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using the "A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews" (AMSTAR2) instrument to evaluate their quality. We developed a narrative synthesis report with eight SRs (15 RCTs/3,685 patients) to summarise the findings. The AMSTAR2 analysis indicated that all reviews had critically low confidence ratings. Statistically significant effects in pain reduction using OT compared to placebo groups were reported in three SRs. OT was shown to be comparable to other therapies in one SR and not superior in the other five. Six SRs highlighted the need for additional RCTs with improved methodological quality to confirm the efficacy of OT for KOA. SRs found fewer consistent effects for improving joint function. Regarding safety, seven SRs reported a low prevalence of minor adverse events linked with OT. Finally, this umbrella review highlights the beneficial effects and safety of OT in the treatment of KOA, particularly in pain control. The low methodological quality of RCTs and SRs limits the possibility of drawing conclusions on the effectiveness of the procedure in comparison to other therapies. Ensure adequate compliance with guidelines such as Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and AMSTAR2 has the ability to improve the quality of SRs in this area.

amstar2Vis: An R package for presenting the critical appraisal of systematic reviews based on the items of AMSTAR 2.

Systematic reviews (SRs) have an important role in the healthcare decision-making practice. Assessing the overall confidence in the results of SRs using quality assessment tools, such as "A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2" (AMSTAR 2), is crucial since not all SRs are conducted using the most rigorous methods. In this article, we introduce a free, open-source R package called "amstar2Vis" (https://github.com/bougioukas/amstar2Vis) that provides easy-to-use functions for presenting the critical appraisal of SRs, based on the items of AMSTAR 2 checklist. An illustrative example is outlined, describing the steps involved in creating a detailed table with the item ratings and the overall confidence ratings, generating a stacked bar plot that shows the distribution of ratings as percentages of SRs for each AMSTAR 2 item, and creating a "ggplot2" graph that shows the distribution of overall confidence ratings ("Critically Low," "Low," "Moderate," or "High"). We expect "amstar2Vis" to be useful for overview authors and methodologists who assess the quality of SRs with AMSTAR 2 checklist and facilitate the production of pertinent publication-ready tables and figures. Future research and applications could further investigate the functionality or potential improvements of our package.

Investigate the relationship between the retraction reasons and the quality of methodology in non-Cochrane retracted systematic reviews: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review aimed to investigate the relationship between retraction status and the methodology quality in the retracted non-Cochrane systematic review. METHOD: PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched with keywords including systematic review, meta-analysis, and retraction or retracted as a type of publication until September 2023. There were no time or language restrictions. Non-Cochrane medical systematic review studies that were retracted were included in the present study. The data related to the retraction status of the articles were extracted from the retraction notice and Retraction Watch, and the quality of the methodology was evaluated with the AMSTAR-2 checklist by two independent researchers. Data were analyzed in the Excel 2019 and SPSS 21 software. RESULT: Of the 282 systematic reviews, the corresponding authors of 208 (73.75%) articles were from China. The average interval between publish and retraction of the article was about 23 months and about half of the non-Cochrane systematic reviews were retracted in the last 4 years. The most common reasons for retractions were fake peer reviews and unreliable data, respectively. Editors and publishers were the most retractors or requestors for retractions. More than 86% of the retracted non-Cochrane SRs were published in journals with an impact factor above two and had a critically low quality. Items 7, 9, and 13 among the critical items of the AMSTAR-2 checklist received the lowest scores. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: There was a significant relationship between the reasons of retraction and the quality of the methodology (P-value < 0.05). Plagiarism software and using the Cope guidelines may decrease the time of retraction. In some countries, strict rules for promoting researchers increase the risk of misconduct. To avoid scientific errors and improve the quality of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs), it is better to create protocol registration and retraction guidelines in each journal for SRs/MAs.

An umbrella review of the literature on the effectiveness of goal setting interventions in improving health outcomes in chronic conditions.

PURPOSE: To identify the contexts in which goal setting has been used in chronic disease management interventions and to estimate the magnitude of its effect on improvement of health outcomes. METHODS: The strength of evidence and extent of potential bias in the published systematic reviews of goal setting interventions in chronic conditions were summarized using AMSTAR2 quality appraisal tool, number of participants, 95% prediction intervals, and between-study heterogeneity. Components of goal setting interventions were also extracted. RESULTS: Nine publications and 35 meta-analysis models were identified, investigating 25 health outcomes. Of the 35 meta-analyses, none found strong evidence and three provided some suggestive evidence on symptom reduction and perceived well-being. There was weak evidence for effects on eight health outcomes (HbA1c, self-efficacy, depression, anxiety, distress, medication adherence, health-related quality of life and physical activity), with the rest classified as non-significant. Half of the meta-analyses had high level of heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Goal setting by itself affects outcomes of chronic diseases only to a small degree. This is not unexpected finding as changing outcomes in chronic diseases requires a complex and individualized approach. Implementing goal setting in a standardized way in the management of chronic conditions would seem to be a way forward.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe link between goal setting and health outcomes seems to be weak.Some levels of positive behavioural change could be of benefits to patients as seen by improved self-efficacy, patients' satisfaction and overall quality of life.Systematic and consistent application of personalized goal-oriented interventions considering patient's readiness to change could better predict improved outcomes.Incorporation of various goal setting components while actively engaging patient and/or their care givers in the process could appraise how goal setting could help with challenges in faced by people living with chronic conditions in different areas.

Measures of cognitive reserve: An umbrella review.

Objective: Recently, there has been a growing interest in operationalizing and measuring cognitive reserve (CR) for clinical and research purposes. This umbrella review aims to summarize the existing systematic and meta-analytic reviews about measures of CR. Method: A literature search was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the guidelines of Aromataris et al. (2015) to identify the systematic reviews and meta-analysis involving the assessment of CR. The methodological quality of the papers included in this umbrella review was assessed with A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) and Specialist Unit for Review Evidence (SURE). Results: Thirty-one reviews were identified, sixteen of which were systematic reviews, and fifteen were meta-analyses. Most of the reviews had a critically low quality, according to AMSTAR-2. The reviews included between two and 135 studies. Most of the papers focused on older adults, mainly those with dementia. CR was measured using one to six proxies, but most considered each proxy separately. The most assessed proxies of CR were education on its own, combined with occupation and/or engagement in activities or combined with parental education, bilingualism, and engagement in activities when four CR proxies were studied. Most of the studies included in higher quality reviews focused on three proxies, with education and engagement in activities being the most evaluated using CR questionnaires. Conclusion: Despite the growing interest in measuring CR, its operationalization did not improve since the last umbrella review in this field.

Most systematic reviews reporting adherence to AMSTAR 2 had critically low methodological quality: a cross-sectional meta-research study.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the methodological quality and characteristics of systematic reviews (SRs) that reported they were conducted in line with the AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a cross-sectional meta-research study. We searched MEDLINE and Embase. We included full reports of SRs reporting the study was conducted, prepared, or designed in line with the AMSTAR 2. Eligible SRs were those published from January 1, 2018, until May 3, 2022. We assessed the methodological quality of the included SRs using AMSTAR 2. RESULTS: We included a total of 45 records. There were 43 SRs and 2 SR protocols. Among them, most were SRs of interventions that included primary studies on humans. More than half had a meta-analysis. According to our overall AMSTAR 2 assessments of included SRs, 35 SRs were of critically low confidence, 7 SRs were of low confidence, and one SR was of high confidence. There were no SRs of moderate confidence. CONCLUSION: Even when authors indicate in their manuscripts that the SR was conducted/prepared/designed in line with the AMSTAR 2, it does not necessarily imply it is of high or even moderate confidence according to AMSTAR 2. A self-assessment with AMSTAR 2 could be required for submission and carefully checked by the editors/peer reviewers.

Quality of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of resveratrol: A methodological systematic review.

Recently, several meta-analyses (MAs) have focused on the health effects of resveratrol. However, the methodological and reporting quality of these MAs has not yet been fully evaluated so far. Therefore, the present study evaluated the quality of these MAs through a methodological systematic review. Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception until May 20, 2022, and PubMed was used to update the search until September 6, 2023. The methodological and reporting quality of the selected MAs was evaluated using AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA 2009. Fifty-one MAs published during 2013-2023 were included. In each review, the number of primary studies ranged from 3 to 37, and the number of participants ranged from 50 to 2114. Among the first-listed primary outcomes, only 23 (45.10%) were "positive." As for the methodological quality, most MAs (44, 86.27%) on resveratrol were rated critically low. Inadequate reporting of the included MAs mainly involved items 2 ("Structured summary"), 5 ("Protocol and registration"), 8 ("Search"), 9 ("Study selection"), 10 ("Data collection process"), 12 ("Risk of bias in individual studies"), and 24 ("Summary of evidence") based on the PRISMA 2009. Additionally, journal's impact factor, number of authors, and funding support were positively associated with the overall methodological quality but were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Future MAs on resveratrol require better design, implementation, and reporting by following the Cochrane Handbook, AMSTAR-2, and PRISMA.

Appraisal methods and outcomes of AMSTAR 2 assessments in overviews of systematic reviews of interventions in the cardiovascular field: A methodological study.

This study aimed to assess the methods and outcomes of The Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 appraisals in overviews of reviews (overviews) of interventions in the cardiovascular field and identify factors that are associated with these outcomes. MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched until November 2022. Eligible were overviews of cardiovascular interventions, analyzing systematic reviews (SRs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Extracted data included characteristics of overviews and SRs and AMSTAR 2 appraisal methods and outcomes. Data were synthesized using descriptive statistics and logistic regression to explore potential associations between the characteristics of SRs and extracted AMSTAR 2 overall ratings ("High-Moderate" vs. "Low-Critically low"). The original results on individual AMSTAR 2 items were entered into the official AMSTAR 2 online tool and the recalculated overall confidence ratings were compared to those provided in overviews. All 34 overviews identified were published between 2019 and 2022. Rating of overall confidence following the algorithm suggested by AMSTAR 2 developers was noted in 74% of overviews. The 679 unique included SRs were mainly of "Critically low" (53%) or "Low" (18.7%) confidence and underperformed in items 2 (Protocol, no = 65.2%) and 7 (List of excluded studies, no = 84%). The following characteristics of SRs were significantly associated with higher overall ratings: Cochrane origin, pharmacological interventions, including exclusively RCTs, citation of methodological and reporting guidelines, protocol, absence of funding and publication after AMSTAR 2 release. Generally, overviews' authors tended to deviate from the original rating scheme and ascribe higher ratings to SRs compared to the official AMSTAR 2 online tool. Most SRs included in overviews of cardiovascular interventions have critically low or low confidence in their results. Overviews' authors should be more transparent about the methods used to derive the overall confidence in SRs.

Current applications of indocyanine green (ICG) in abdominal, gynecologic and urologic surgery: a meta-review and quality analysis with use of the AMSTAR 2 instrument.

BACKGROUND: Indocyanine green (ICG) is an injectable fluorochrome that has recently gained popularity as a means of assisting intraoperative visualization during laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Many systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been published. We conducted a meta-review to synthesize the findings of these studies. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses coping with the uses of ICG in abdominal operations, including Metabolic Bariatric Surgery, Cholecystectomy, Colorectal, Esophageal, Gastric, Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary, Obstetrics and Gynecology (OG), Pediatric Surgery, Surgical Oncology, Urology, (abdominal) Vascular Surgery, Adrenal and Splenic Surgery, and Interdisciplinary tasks, until September 2023. We submitted the retrieved meta-analyses to qualitative analysis based on the AMSTAR 2 instrument. RESULTS: We identified 116 studies, 41 systematic reviews (SRs) and 75 meta-analyses (MAs), spanning 2013-2023. The most thoroughly investigated (sub)specialties were Colorectal (6 SRs, 25 MAs), OG (9 SRs, 15 MAs), and HPB (4 SRs, 12 MAs). Interestingly, there was high heterogeneity regarding the administered ICG doses, routes, and timing. The use of ICG offered a clear benefit regarding anastomotic leak prevention, particularly after colorectal and esophageal surgery. There was no clear benefit regarding sentinel node detection after OG. According to the AMSTAR 2 tool, most meta-analyses ranked as "critically low" (34.7%) or "low" (58.7%) quality. There were only five meta-analyses (6.7%) that qualified as "moderate" quality, whereas there were no "high" quality reviews. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of the abundance of pertinent literature and reviews, surgeons should be cautious when interpreting their results on ICG use in abdominal surgery. Future reviews should focus on ensuring methodological vigor; establishing clear protocols of ICG dose, route of administration, and timing; and improving reporting quality. Other sources of data (e.g., registries) and novel methods of data analysis (e.g., machine learning) might also contribute to an enhanced role of ICG as a decision-making tool in surgery.

Association between ultra-processed foods consumption and the risk of hypertension: An umbrella review of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Several systematic reviews (SRs) have investigated the association between ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and the risk of hypertension in various populations. However, the quality of the evidence remains unclear. This umbrella review was thus conducted to fill this gap. METHODS: We searched for SRs with and without meta-analyses comparing high UPF versus low UPF consumption on the risk of hypertension in the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science from inception to August 2022. This study was registered in PROSPERO (No. CRD42022352934). The A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) tool and the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis 2009 (PRISMA 2009) statement were used to evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of the included SRs. Stata 15/SE was used to reanalyse the data using the random-effects model, and the risk of bias of observational studies from included SRs was reassessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) tool. The certainty of the evidence body was assessed using the GRADE recommendation. RESULTS: Seven SRs were included in the umbrella review. Among them, nine observational studies (5 cross-sectional and 4 cohort studies), whose available data were resynthesised using meta-analysis. The methodological and reporting quality of the included SRs were relatively poor. The meta-analysis results revealed suggestive evidence of an association between high UPF consumption and the incidence of hypertension (odds ratio: 1.23, 95% confidence interval: 1.11 to 1.37, p < 0.001, 95% prediction interval: 0.92 to 1.64, critically low certainty) compared to low UPF consumption. CONCLUSION: High UPF consumption is associated with an increased risk of hypertension. However, well-conducted SRs, including high-quality prospective cohort studies, are needed to further verify these findings.

[Evidence mapping analysis of traditional Chinese medicine intervention in pulmonary fibrosis].

This study utilized evidence mapping methodology to systematically identify, describe, and evaluate the evidence from relevant research on traditional Chinese medicine(TCM) interventions in patients with pulmonary fibrosis. CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, SinoMed, PubMed, Web of Science, EMbase, and Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to March 2023 for systematic reviews/Meta-analysis/network Meta-analysis on TCM interventions in pulmonary fibrosis. The quality of included studies was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 scale, and the evidence mapping approach was employed to present comprehensive information on populations, intervention methods, the sample size in systematic reviews/Meta-analysis, and conclusion classifications. Ultimately, 44 systematic reviews/Meta-analysis/network Meta-analysis were included. Apart from syndrome differentiation and treatment, TCM injections accounted for a significant proportion of the observed interventions. The treatment methods were mainly focused on nourishing Qi and Yin, promoting blood circulation, resolving stasis, and dredging collaterals. The results from the included studies demonstrated that TCM treatment for pulmonary fibrosis could improve efficacy, increase lung function, improve PaO_(2 )levels, increase the 6-minute walk distance(6MWD), alleviate clinical symptoms, and enhance patients' quality of life. Based on the assessment using the AMSTAR 2 scale, methodological issues were identified, including the lack of protocol registration, failure to provide a list of excluded literature, and incomplete explanations regarding the impact of heterogeneity and bias on the results. The evidence mapping revealed that 42 conclusions were beneficial, while two conclusions were potentially beneficial. Overall, the quality of evidence was relatively low, primarily due to methodological imprecision and publication bias. Although TCM showed certain efficacy in the treatment of pulmonary fibrosis, the quality of reported literature, methodological quality, and overall evidence quality need improvement. It is recommended to conduct high-quality and standardized studies in the future to provide better evidence-based guidance.

Methodological quality of systematic reviews in dentistry including animal studies: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews including animal models can be heterogeneous. We assessed the methodological quality of systematic reviews including animal models in dentistry as well as the overall confidence in the results of those systematic reviews. MATERIAL & METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus were searched for systematic reviews including animal studies in dentistry published later than January 2010 until 18th of July 2022. Overall confidence in the results was assessed using a modified version of the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) checklist. Checklist items were rated as yes, partial yes, no and not applicable. Linear regression analysis was used to investigate associations between systematic review characteristics and the overall adherence to the AMSTAR-2 checklist. The overall confidence in the results was calculated based on the number of critical and non-critical weaknesses presented in the AMSTAR-2 items and rated as high, moderate, low and critical low. RESULTS: Of initially 951 retrieved systematic reviews, 190 were included in the study. The overall confidence in the results was low in 43 (22.6%) and critically low in 133 (70.0%) systematic reviews. While some AMSTAR-2 items were regularly reported (e.g. conflict of interest, selection in duplicate), others were not (e.g. FUNDING: n = 1; 0.5%). Multivariable linear regression analysis showed that the adherence scores of AMSTAR-2 was significantly associated with publication year, journal impact factor (IF), topic, and the use of tools to assess risk of bias (RoB) of the systematic reviews. CONCLUSION: Although the methodological quality of dental systematic reviews of animal models improved over the years, it is still suboptimal. The overall confidence in the results was mostly low or critically low. Systematic reviews, which were published later, published in a journal with a higher IF, focused on non-surgery topics, and used at least one tool to assess RoB correlated with greater adherence to the AMSTAR-2 guidelines.