Aims: To evaluate the methodological quality of systematic reviews (SRs), and summarize evidence of important outcomes from dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4-I) in treating type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).
Methods: We included SRs of DPP4-I for the treatment of T2DM until January, 2018 by searching the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE and three Chinese databases. We evaluated the methodological qualities with the AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) tool and the GRADE (The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.
Results: Sixty-three SRs (a total of 2,603,140 participants) receiving DPP4-I for the treatment of T2DM were included. The results of AMSTAR showed that the lowest quality was "a list of studies (included and excluded) item" with only one (1.6%) study provided, followed by the "providing a priori design" item with only four (6.3%) studies conforming to this item, the next were "the status of publication (gray literature) used as an inclusion criterion item", with only 18 (28.9%) studies conforming to these items. Only seven (11.1%) studies scored more than nine points in AMSTAR, indicating high methodological quality. For GRADE, of the 128 outcomes, high quality evidence was provided in only 28 (21.9%), moderate in 70 (54.7%), low in 27 (21.1%), and very low in three (2.3%).
Conclusions: The methodological quality of SRs of DPP4-I for type 2 diabetes mellitus is not high and there are common areas for improvement. Furthermore, the quality of evidence level is moderate and more high quality evidence is needed.
Keywords: AMSTAR; Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors; GRADE; Systematic reviews; Type 2 diabetes mellitus.