Epidemiology, quality, and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of nursing interventions published in Chinese journals

Juxia Zhang; Jiancheng Wang; Lin Han; Fengwa Zhang; Jianxun Cao; Yuxia Ma

doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2014.11.020

Epidemiology, quality, and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of nursing interventions published in Chinese journals

Nurs Outlook. 2015 Jul-Aug;63(4):446-455.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2014.11.020. Epub 2014 Dec 4.

Authors

Juxia Zhang¹, Jiancheng Wang², Lin Han³, Fengwa Zhang², Jianxun Cao³, Yuxia Ma⁴

Affiliations

¹ Nursing Department, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, China. Electronic address: juxia2008@hotmail.com.
² Evidence-Based Medicine Center, Institute of Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.
³ Nursing Department, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.
⁴ Northwest University for Nationalities, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.

PMID: 26187084
DOI: 10.1016/j.outlook.2014.11.020

Abstract

Objectives: Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) of nursing interventions have become increasingly popular in China. This review provides the first examination of epidemiological characteristics of these SRs as well as compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews guidelines. The purpose of this study was to examine epidemiologic and reporting characteristics as well as the methodologic quality of SRs and MAs of nursing interventions published in Chinese journals.

Methods: Four Chinese databases were searched (the Chinese Biomedicine Literature Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Full-text Database, Chinese Journal Full-text Database, and Wanfang Database) for SRs and MAs of nursing intervention from inception through June 2013. Data were extracted into Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA). The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses checklists were used to assess methodologic quality and reporting characteristics, respectively.

Results: A total of 144 SRs were identified, most (97.2%) of which used "systematic review" or "meta-analyses" in the titles. None of the reviews had been updated. Nearly half (41%) were written by nurses, and more than half (61%) were reported in specialist journals. The most common conditions studied were endocrine, nutritional and metabolic diseases, and neoplasms. Most (70.8%) reported information about quality assessment, whereas less than half (25%) reported assessing for publication bias. None of the reviews reported a conflict of interest.

Conclusions: Although many SRs of nursing interventions have been published in Chinese journals, the quality of these reviews is of concern. As a potential key source of information for nurses and nursing administrators, not only were many of these reviews incomplete in the information they provided, but also some results were misleading. Improving the quality of SRs of nursing interventions conducted and published by nurses in China is urgently needed in order to increase the value of these studies.

Keywords: Chinese journals; methodologic quality; systematic reviews.

Publication types

Review
Systematic Review

MeSH terms

China
Humans
Meta-Analysis as Topic*
Nursing*
Periodicals as Topic / standards*
Publishing / standards*
Quality Control
Review Literature as Topic*