Europe PMC

This website requires cookies, and the limited processing of your personal data in order to function. By using the site you are agreeing to this as outlined in our privacy notice and cookie policy.

Reporting and Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews Underpinning Clinical Practice Guidelines for Vascular Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Author information

Affiliations

  • 1. Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
      Authors
    • Murigu A 1
    (1 author)
  • 2. Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK; North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK.
      Authors
    • Wong KHF 2
    (1 author)
  • 3. University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
      Authors
    • Mercer RT 3
    (1 author)
  • 4. North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK; University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
      Authors
    • Hinchcliffe RJ 4
    • Twine CP 4
    (2 authors)

European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery : the Official Journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery, 13 Nov 2024, :S1078-5884(24)00966-3
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2024.11.010 PMID: 39547389 

Review

Abstract 

Objective

Clinical practice guideline recommendations are often informed by systematic reviews. This review aimed to appraise the reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews informing clinical practice recommendations relevant to vascular surgery.

Data sources

MEDLINE and Embase.

Methods

MEDLINE and Embase were searched from 1 January 2021 to 5 May 2023 for clinical practice guidelines relevant to vascular surgery. Guidelines were then screened for systematic reviews informing recommendations. The reporting and methodological quality of these systematic reviews were assessed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) 2017 tool. Pearson correlation and multiple regression analyses were performed to determine associations between these scores and extracted study characteristics.

Results

Eleven clinical practice guidelines were obtained, containing 1 783 references informing guideline recommendations. From these, 215 systematic reviews were included for synthesis. PRISMA item completeness ranged 14 - 100%, with a mean of 63% across reviews. AMSTAR 2 item completeness ranged 2 - 95%, with a mean of 50%. Pearson correlation highlighted a statistically significant association between a review's PRISMA and AMSTAR 2 score (r = 0.85, p < .001). A more recent publication year was associated with a statistically significant increase in both scores (PRISMA coefficient 1.28, p < .001; and AMSTAR 2 coefficient 1.31, p < .001). Similarly, the presence of funding in a systematic review was shown to be statistically significantly associated with an increase in both PRISMA and AMSTAR 2 scores (coefficient 4.93, p = .024; and coefficient 6.07, p = .019, respectively).

Conclusion

Systematic reviews informing clinical practice guidelines relevant to vascular surgery were of moderate quality at best. Organisations producing clinical practice guidelines should consider funding systematic reviews to improve the quality of their recommendations.

Full text links 

Read article at publisher's site: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2024.11.010