• Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, 210023, P.R.China;
WEI Qi, Email: art_njucm@126.com
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

ObjectivesTo assess the methodological quality and reporting quality of meta-analysis published on The Chinese Journal of Nursing.MethodsCNKI and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect meta-analysis which published on The Chinese Journal of Nursing from inception to December 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the methodological quality and the reporting quality by AMSTAR scale and PRISMA statement. Statistical analysis was then performed by using SPSS 19.0 software.ResultsA total of 53 meta-analyses were included, which involved 7 disease systems and sub-health status. The mean score of the methodological assessment by AMSTAR was 7.75±1.32, including 9 high-quality papers (17.0%), 41 middle-quality papers (77.4%), and 3 low-quality papers (5.6%). The mean score of the reporting quality assessment by PRISMA was 22.5±3.08, including 39 relatively complete papers (73.6%), 11 papers with certain defects (20.8%), and 3 papers with serious defects (5.6%).ConclusionsThe methodological and reporting quality of meta-analysis published on The Chinese Journal of Nursing deserves further improvement.

Citation: LI Weitong, CHEN Yujing, DING Huan, XU Yun, WEI Qi. Quality assessment of meta-analyses published on The Chinese Journal of Nursing . Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2018, 18(5): 498-505. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.201803029 Copy

  • Previous Article

    Efficacy and safety of operation versus non-operation for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures: a meta-analysis
  • Next Article

    Application and effect of one-stop search tool in systematic review