Reporting and Methodological Qualities of Systematic Reviews in Rehabilitation Journals After 2020: A Cross-Sectional Meta-Epidemiological Study

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this study was to investigate the reporting and methodological qualities in systematic reviews (SRs) of rehabilitation journals following updating to the use of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement.

Methods

SRs with pairwise meta-analyses on the effects of health interventions were selected, which were published in rehabilitation journals in 2020, 2021, and 2022 using MEDLINE (PubMed). Exposure was defined as reporting use of the PRISMA 2020 statement. A comparison group consisted of SRs that did not use the PRISMA 2020 statement. The adherence of the PRISMA 2020 items, PRISMA 2020 for abstracts, and A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 items were evaluated.

Results

Thirteen thousand, three hundred eighty-one articles were identified after conducting a search on April 2, 2023. The study included 100 articles each that used and those that did not use the PRISMA 2020 statement. Of 41 items in the PRISMA 2020 statement, 48.8% (20/41) adhered to ≥80% of each item for those that used the PRISMA 2020 statement and 41.5% (17/41) in those that did not use the PRISMA 2020 statement. The PRISMA 2020 statement did not lead to any major improvement, and only a slight improvement of 9.8% (4/41) was observed when compared with those that did not use the PRISMA 2020 statement. Similarly, no item improved in the PRISMA 2020 for abstracts, and only 5.6% (1/18) improved in the AMSTAR 2 items.

Conclusion

This study showed that reporting use of the PRISMA 2020 statement did not result in any major improvements; however, only a slight improvement was observed in the reporting and methodological qualities of SRs in rehabilitation journals. Researchers should adhere to each item in the PRISMA 2020 statement in SRs published in rehabilitation journals.

Impact

The reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in rehabilitation journals is insufficient. It is important to improve the reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in rehabilitation journals. It is recommended that researchers not only declare their reporting use of the PRISMA 2020 statement, but also adhere to each item correctly.

Amstar 2, Meta-Epidemiological Study, Methodological Quality, Prisma 2020, Rehabilitation, Reporting Quality