Assessment for Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in the Field of Hepatology.
- Author:
Gaeun KIM
1
;
Youn Zoo CHO
;
Soon Koo BAIK
Author Information
- Publication Type:Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't ; Review
- Keywords: Systematic review; Meta-analysis; Assess the Methodological quality of systematic review; Hepatology
- MeSH: *Gastroenterology; Humans; *Meta-Analysis as Topic; *Publication Bias; *Review Literature as Topic
- From:Gut and Liver 2015;9(6):701-706
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: A systematic review (SR) provides the best and most objective analysis of the existing evidence in a particular field. SRs and derived conclusions are essential for evidence-based strategies in medicine and evidence-based guidelines in clinical practice. The popularity of SRs has also increased markedly in the field of hepatology. However, although SRs are considered to provide a higher level of evidence with greater confidence than original articles, there have been no reports on the quality of SRs and meta-analyses (MAs) in the field of hepatology. Therefore, we performed a quality assessment of 225 SRs and MAs that were recently published in the field of hepatology (January 2011 to September 2014) using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Using AMSTAR, we revealed both a shortage of assessments of the scientific quality of individual studies and a publication bias in many SRs and MAs. This review addresses the concern that SRs and MAs need to be conducted in a stricter and more objective manner to minimize bias and random errors. Thus, SRs and MAs should be supported by a multi-disciplinary approach that includes clinical experts, methodologists, and statisticians.
