BMJ  2006;332:202-209 (28 January), doi:10.1136/bmj.38693.516782.7C (published 16 January 2006)

Research

Compliance with QUOROM and quality of reporting of overlapping meta-analyses on the role of acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast associated nephropathy: case study

¹ Hemodynamics and Cardiovascular Radiology Service, Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy, ² Institute of Medical Statistics and Biometrics, University of Milan, Milan, Italy, ³ Institute of Cardiology, Catholic University, Rome, Italy, ⁴ Department of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Medical College of Virginia Campus, Richmond, VA, USA, ⁵ School of Engineering, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa, ⁶ Thorax Center, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, ⁷ Department of Cardiology, Catholic University Hospital, Campobasso, Italy, ⁸ AZ Middelheim Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium

Abstract

Objective To appraise multiple systematic reviews on the same clinical topic, focusing on predictors and correlates of quality of reporting of meta-analysis (QUOROM) scores.

Design Case study.

Setting Reviews providing at least individual quantitative estimates on role of acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast associated nephropathy.

Data sources PubMed, the database of abstracts of reviews of effects, and the Cochrane database of systematic reviews (updated March 2005).

Main outcome measures Funding, compliance with the QUOROM checklist, scores on the Oxman and Guyatt quality index, and authors' recommendations.

Results 10 systematic reviews, published August 2003 to March 2005, were included. Nine pooled events despite heterogeneity and five recommended routine use of acetylcysteine, whereas the remaining studies called for further research. Compliance with the 18 items on the QUOROM checklist was relatively high (median 16, range 11 to 17), although shorter manuscripts had significantly lower scores (R = 0.73; P = 0.016). Reviewers who reported previous not for profit funding were more likely to score higher on the Oxman and Guyatt quality index. No association was found between QUOROM and Oxman and Guyatt scores (R = -0.06; P = 0.86), mainly because of greater emphasis of the Oxman and Guyatt scores on the appraisal of bias in selection and validity assessment (inadequate in five reviews).

Conclusions Multiple systematic reviews on the same clinical topic varied in quality of reporting and recommendations. Longer manuscripts and previous not for profit funding were associated with higher quality.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Related Articles

Let's look at duplicate systematic reviews
BMJ 2006 332: 0. [Full Text]

Number of published systematic reviews and global burden of disease: database analysis

George H Swingler, Jimmy Volmink, and John P A Ioannidis
BMJ 2003 327: 1083-1084. [Full Text] [PDF]

Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review

Joel Lexchin, Lisa A Bero, Benjamin Djulbegovic, and Otavio Clark
BMJ 2003 326: 1167-1170. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

The need for caution in interpreting high quality systematic reviews

Kevork Hopayian
BMJ 2001 323: 681-684. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation

Alejandro R Jadad, Michael Moher, George P Browman, Lynda Booker, Christopher Sigouin, Mario Fuentes, and Robert Stevens
BMJ 2000 320: 537-540. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

The relation between treatment benefit and underlying risk in meta-analysis

Stephen J Sharp, Simon G Thompson, and Douglas G Altman
BMJ 1996 313: 735-738. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Mrkobrada, M., Thiessen-Philbrook, H., Haynes, R. B., Iansavichus, A. V., Rehman, F., Garg, A. X. (2008). Need for Quality Improvement in Renal Systematic Reviews. CJASN 3: 1102-1114 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Cornell, J. E., Laine, C. (2008). The Science and Art of Deduction: Complex Systematic Overviews. ANN INTERN MED 148: 786-788 [Full text]  
• Garg, A. X., Hackam, D., Tonelli, M. (2008). Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: When One Study Is Just not Enough. CJASN 3: 253-260 [Full text]  
• Poolman, R. W., Abouali, J. A.K., Conter, H. J., Bhandari, M. (2007). Overlapping Systematic Reviews of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Comparing Hamstring Autograft with Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Autograft: Why Are They Different?. JBJS 89: 1542-1552 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Grimble, G. K. (2007). Adverse Gastrointestinal Effects of Arginine and Related Amino Acids. J. Nutr. 137: 1693S-1701S [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Biondi-Zoccai, G. G.L., Abbate, A., Valgimigli, M., Agostoni, P. (2007). Keeping a high standard in quantitative analyses, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews. Eur Heart J 0: ehl502v1-1 [Full text]  
• Ligthart, S., Vlemmix, F., Dendukuri, N., Brophy, J. M. (2007). The cost-effectiveness of drug-eluting stents: a systematic review. CMAJ 176: 199-205 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Biondi-Zoccai, G. G. L., Abbate, A., Valgimigli, M., Testa, L., Agostoni, P. (2006). From Chaotic to Coordinated Clinical Research: The Case of Acetylcysteine.. Arch Intern Med 166: 1668-1668 [Full text]  
• Testa, L., Trotta, G., Abbate, A., Agostoni, P., Biondi-Zoccai, G. G.L. (2006). Low-Dose Aspirin for Stroke Prevention. Stroke 37: 1356-1356 [Full text]