Evaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)

Background:. Breast reconstruction is an important aspect in breast cancer treatment. Methods:. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews was performed. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses that focused on breast reconstruction and were published betwe...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Morgan Yuan, BHSc, Jeremy Wu, BMSc, Ryan E. Austin, MD, Stefan O.P. Hofer, MD, PhD, Frank Lista, MD, Jamil Ahmad, MD
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Wolters Kluwer 2021
Materias:	Surgery RD1-811
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/65c8f2329c4f4b919996888ab8b55f17
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:65c8f2329c4f4b919996888ab8b55f17
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:65c8f2329c4f4b919996888ab8b55f172021-11-25T07:58:04ZEvaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)2169-757410.1097/GOX.0000000000003897https://doaj.org/article/65c8f2329c4f4b919996888ab8b55f172021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttp://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003897https://doaj.org/toc/2169-7574Background:. Breast reconstruction is an important aspect in breast cancer treatment. Methods:. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews was performed. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses that focused on breast reconstruction and were published between 2000 and 2020 were included. Quality assessment was performed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Study characteristics were extracted, including journal and impact factor, year of publication, country affiliation, reporting adherence to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, number of citations, and number of studies included. Results:. The average AMSTAR score was moderate (5.32). There was a significant increase in AMSTAR score (P < 0.01) and number of studies (P < 0.01) over time. There were no significant correlations between AMSTAR score and impact factor (P = 0.038), and AMSTAR score and number of citations (P = 0.52), but there was a significant association between AMSTAR score and number of studies (P = 0.013). Studies that adhered to the PRISMA statement had a higher AMSTAR score on average (P < 0.01). Conclusions:. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses about breast reconstruction had, on average, a moderate AMSTAR score. The number of studies and methodological quality have increased over time. Study characteristics including adherence to PRISMA guidelines are associated with improved methodological quality. Further improvements in specific AMSTAR domains would improve the overall methodological quality.Morgan Yuan, BHScJeremy Wu, BMScRyan E. Austin, MDStefan O.P. Hofer, MD, PhDFrank Lista, MDJamil Ahmad, MDWolters KluwerarticleSurgeryRD1-811ENPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open, Vol 9, Iss 11, p e3897 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Surgery RD1-811
spellingShingle	Surgery RD1-811 Morgan Yuan, BHSc Jeremy Wu, BMSc Ryan E. Austin, MD Stefan O.P. Hofer, MD, PhD Frank Lista, MD Jamil Ahmad, MD Evaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)
description	Background:. Breast reconstruction is an important aspect in breast cancer treatment. Methods:. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews was performed. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses that focused on breast reconstruction and were published between 2000 and 2020 were included. Quality assessment was performed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Study characteristics were extracted, including journal and impact factor, year of publication, country affiliation, reporting adherence to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, number of citations, and number of studies included. Results:. The average AMSTAR score was moderate (5.32). There was a significant increase in AMSTAR score (P < 0.01) and number of studies (P < 0.01) over time. There were no significant correlations between AMSTAR score and impact factor (P = 0.038), and AMSTAR score and number of citations (P = 0.52), but there was a significant association between AMSTAR score and number of studies (P = 0.013). Studies that adhered to the PRISMA statement had a higher AMSTAR score on average (P < 0.01). Conclusions:. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses about breast reconstruction had, on average, a moderate AMSTAR score. The number of studies and methodological quality have increased over time. Study characteristics including adherence to PRISMA guidelines are associated with improved methodological quality. Further improvements in specific AMSTAR domains would improve the overall methodological quality.
format	article
author	Morgan Yuan, BHSc Jeremy Wu, BMSc Ryan E. Austin, MD Stefan O.P. Hofer, MD, PhD Frank Lista, MD Jamil Ahmad, MD
author_facet	Morgan Yuan, BHSc Jeremy Wu, BMSc Ryan E. Austin, MD Stefan O.P. Hofer, MD, PhD Frank Lista, MD Jamil Ahmad, MD
author_sort	Morgan Yuan, BHSc
title	Evaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)
title_short	Evaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)
title_full	Evaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)
title_fullStr	Evaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)
title_full_unstemmed	Evaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)
title_sort	evaluating breast reconstruction reviews using a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (amstar)
publisher	Wolters Kluwer
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/65c8f2329c4f4b919996888ab8b55f17
work_keys_str_mv	AT morganyuanbhsc evaluatingbreastreconstructionreviewsusingameasurementtooltoassesssystematicreviewsamstar AT jeremywubmsc evaluatingbreastreconstructionreviewsusingameasurementtooltoassesssystematicreviewsamstar AT ryaneaustinmd evaluatingbreastreconstructionreviewsusingameasurementtooltoassesssystematicreviewsamstar AT stefanophofermdphd evaluatingbreastreconstructionreviewsusingameasurementtooltoassesssystematicreviewsamstar AT franklistamd evaluatingbreastreconstructionreviewsusingameasurementtooltoassesssystematicreviewsamstar AT jamilahmadmd evaluatingbreastreconstructionreviewsusingameasurementtooltoassesssystematicreviewsamstar
_version_	1718413560211570688

Evaluating Breast Reconstruction Reviews Using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)

Ejemplares similares