Cargando...
Characteristics and quality of systematic reviews led by Peruvian authors: A scoping review
Author(s)
Brañez-Condorena, Ana
Mejia, Jhonatan R.
Universidad Científica del Sur
Chavez-Rimache, Lesly Karem
Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola
Fernandez-Guzman, Daniel
Universidad Científica del Sur
Martinez-Rivera, Raisa N.
Universidad Nacional de Piura
Becerra-Chauca, Naysha
Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia
Delgado-Flores, Carolina J.
Universidad Científica del Sur
Taype-Rondán, Álvaro Renzo
Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola
Date Issued
24 de agosto de 2024
Type
Review
Publisher
Elsevier Ltd
Volume
10
Issue
17
Series/Report No.
Heliyon
Contained in
Heliyon
ISSN
2405-8440
Abstract
Background Systematic reviews (SRs) worldwide suffer from methodological deficiencies, potentially biasing intervention decisions, and Peruvian SRs are no exception. Evaluating SRs led by Peruvian researchers is a crucial step to enhance quality and transparency in decision-making and to identify topics where SRs are either scarce or prioritized for research. Objective To describe the characteristics and assess the methodological quality of SRs with Peruvian first authors. Methods We conducted a scoping review within the Scopus database on January 5, 2023. We aimed to identify published SRs of interventions in which the first author had a Peruvian affiliation, published between 2013 and 2022. We evaluated the methodological quality of these SRs using the AMSTAR 2 tool. We assessed the factors associated with the AMSTAR 2 score using adjusted mean differences (aMD), including their 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI). Results We identified 95 eligible SRs, with a clear upward trend. SRs were primarily published in Q1 (43.2 %) and Q2 (23.2 %) journals, predominantly affiliated with institutions in Lima (90.5 %). Areas like infectious diseases (20.0 %) and dentistry (18.9 %) were most frequent. AMSTAR 2 assessments highlighted deficiencies, with few SRs reporting prior protocols (37.9 %), comprehensive search strategies (23.2 %), explanations for excluded studies (20.0 %), adequate descriptions of included studies (38.3 %), or funding sources (19.1 %). Notably, SRs in Q4 journals (aMD: -19.7, 95 % CI: -33.8 to -5.5) and those on surgical interventions (aMD: -22.6, 95 % CI: -34.7 to -10.4) had lower AMSTAR 2 scores. Conclusions Although Peruvian-led SRs are increasingly being published, critical deficiencies are common, especially in reporting protocols, search strategies, study descriptions, and funding sources. Addressing these gaps is pivotal for enhancing the credibility and utility of these SRs in informing decision-making.
Keywords