How about the evidence assessment tools used in education and management systematic reviews?

Hui Lan; Xuan Yu; Zhe Wang; Ping Wang; Yajia Sun; Zijun Wang; Renfeng Su; Ling Wang; Junxian Zhao; Yue Hu; Shouyuan Wu; Mengjuan Ren; Kehu Yang; Xingrong Liu; Yaolong Chen

doi:10.3389/fmed.2023.1160289

How about the evidence assessment tools used in education and management systematic reviews?

Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 May 9:10:1160289. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1160289. eCollection 2023.

Authors

Hui Lan¹, Xuan Yu², Zhe Wang³, Ping Wang², Yajia Sun¹, Zijun Wang², Renfeng Su¹, Ling Wang¹, Junxian Zhao¹, Yue Hu¹, Shouyuan Wu¹, Mengjuan Ren¹, Kehu Yang^{2

4}, Xingrong Liu¹, Yaolong Chen^{1

2

5

6

7}

Affiliations

¹ School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
² School of Basic Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
³ School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
⁴ Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China.
⁵ Lanzhou University Institute of Health Data Science, Lanzhou, China.
⁶ WHO Collaborating Center for Guideline Implementation and Knowledge Translation, Lanzhou, China.
⁷ Research Unit of Evidence-Based Evaluation and Guidelines, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Lanzhou, China.

Abstract

Objectives: To systematically analyze the use of evidence assessment tools in systematic reviews of management and education.

Study design and setting: We systematically searched selected literature databases and websites to identify systematic reviews on management and education. We extracted general information of the included studies and information about the evidence assessment tool they applied, including whether it was used for methodological quality assessment, reporting quality assessment or evidence grading, as well as the name, reference, publication year, version and original intended use of the tool, the role of the tool in the systematic review, and whether the quality determination criteria were given.

Results: A total of 299 systematic reviews were included, of which only 34.8% used evidence assessment tools. A total of 66 different evidence assessment tools were used, of which Risk of Bias (ROB) and its updated version (n = 16, 15.4%) were the most frequent. The specific roles of the evidence assessment tools were reported clearly in 57 reviews, and 27 reviews used two tools.

Conclusion: Evidence assessment tools were seldom used in systematic reviews in social sciences. The understanding and reporting of evidence assessment tools among the researchers and users still needs improvement.

Keywords: bias; education; evidence based medicine; social science; systematic review.