Objective: To evaluate the standardization of Meta-analyses on nephropathy published in Chinese journals.
Methods: By searching in WANFANG, VIP, CNKI databases and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) as well as related Chinese journals, eligible Meta-analyses were enrolled and analyzed according to the PRISMA(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Statement and the MOOSE (Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) Checklist.
Results: A total of 217 Meta-analyses were enrolled with 166 on randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 51 on observational studies. Based on the PRSIMA Statement, of the 166 Meta-analyses on RCT, 51.8% (86 papers) were found with the complete research hypothesis, 13.9% (23) with the literature screening flow chart, 15.7% (26) with the subgroup analysis, 53.0% (88) with the publication bias analysis and 28.3% (47) with the sensitivity analysis. According to the MOOSE Checklist, of the 51 Meta-analyses on observational studies, only 9.8% (5) had done the statistical stability calculation, 54.9% (28) with the outlook of application, 45.1% (23) with the limitation of the study, 2.0% (1) with the quantitative analysis on potential bias and 17.6% (9) with the suggestion for future studies.
Conclusions: Unclear hypothesis, limited methodological description, lack of in-depth analysis on heterogeneity and bias are the common defects in Meta-analyses published in Chinese journals on nephrology.