Changing patterns in reporting and sharing of review data in systematic reviews with meta-analysis of the effects of interventions: cross sectional meta-research study.

Autor:	Nguyen PY; Methods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia., Kanukula R; Methods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia., McKenzie JE; Methods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia., Alqaidoom Z; Methods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia., Brennan SE; Methods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia., Haddaway NR; Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research, Müncheberg, Germany.; Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.; African Centre for Evidence, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa., Hamilton DG; School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia., Karunananthan S; Interdisciplinary School of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.; Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada., McDonald S; Methods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia., Moher D; Centre for Journalology, Clinical Epidemiology Programme, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.; School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada., Nakagawa S; Evolution & Ecology Research Centre and School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia., Nunan D; Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford University, Oxford, UK., Tugwell P; Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.; School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.; Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada., Welch VA; Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.; School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada., Page MJ; Methods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	BMJ (Clinical research ed.) [BMJ] 2022 Nov 22; Vol. 379, pp. e072428. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Nov 22.
DOI:	10.1136/bmj-2022-072428
Abstrakt:	Objectives: To examine changes in completeness of reporting and frequency of sharing data, analytical code, and other review materials in systematic reviews over time; and factors associated with these changes. Design: Cross sectional meta-research study. Population: Random sample of 300 systematic reviews with meta-analysis of aggregate data on the effects of a health, social, behavioural, or educational intervention. Reviews were indexed in PubMed, Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index, Scopus, and Education Collection in November 2020. Main Outcome Measures: The extent of complete reporting and the frequency of sharing review materials in the systematic reviews indexed in 2020 were compared with 110 systematic reviews indexed in February 2014. Associations between completeness of reporting and various factors (eg, self-reported use of reporting guidelines, journal policies on data sharing) were examined by calculating risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Results: Several items were reported suboptimally among 300 systematic reviews from 2020, such as a registration record for the review (n=113; 38%), a full search strategy for at least one database (n=214; 71%), methods used to assess risk of bias (n=185; 62%), methods used to prepare data for meta-analysis (n=101; 34%), and source of funding for the review (n=215; 72%). Only a few items not already reported at a high frequency in 2014 were reported more frequently in 2020. No evidence indicated that reviews using a reporting guideline were more completely reported than reviews not using a guideline. Reviews published in 2020 in journals that mandated either data sharing or inclusion of data availability statements were more likely to share their review materials (eg, data, code files) than reviews in journals without such mandates (16/87 (18%) v 4/213 (2%)). Conclusion: Incomplete reporting of several recommended items for systematic reviews persists, even in reviews that claim to have followed a reporting guideline. Journal policies on data sharing might encourage sharing of review materials. Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at https://www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: support from the Australian Research Council for the submitted work; some authors had support from research institutions listed in the funding statement; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu