Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38012566›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2023

The methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews/meta-analyses of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome using AMSTAR2.

Xin Guan, Yongfeng Lao, Jian Wang, Yanan Wang, Yanan Bai, Xiaolong Li, Shuai Liu, Zewen Li, Fuhan Li, Zhilong Dong

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Xin Guan *Second Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yongfeng Lao *Second Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Jian Wang *Second Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yanan WangSecond Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yanan BaiSecond Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Xiaolong LiSecond Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Shuai LiuSecond Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Zewen LiSecond Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Fuhan LiSecond Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Zhilong DongSecond Clinical Medical College, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China. dzl19780829@163.com.

Funding

Cuiying Scientific Training Program for Undergraduates of Lanzhou University Second Hospital No. CYXZ2021-16 and CYXZ2022-41National Natural Science Foundation of China No. 82160148
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to assess the methodological quality of the systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) of chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) using A Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR2) and to explore the potential influencing factors.

methodsPubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies. AMSTAR2 was used for evaluating the methodological quality of eligible SRs/MAs. Differences between methodological characteristics of SRs/MAs were compared using chi-square tests. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess reviewer agreement in the pre-experiment. Multivariate regression analysis was used to identify potential factors affecting methodological quality.

resultsA total of 45 SRs/MAs were included. After AMSTAR2 evaluation, only two (4.4%) of 45 SRs/MAs were moderate, three (6.7%) were rated as low quality, and the remainder 40 (88.9%) were rated as critically low quality. Among the 16 items of AMSTAR2, item 3 and item 10 had the poorest adherence. Item 4 received the most significant number of "Partial Yes" responses. Univariable analysis indicated that there were significant differences in methodological quality in SRs between different continents (P = 0.027) as well as between preregistered SRs and those that were not (P = 0.004). However, in multivariate analysis, there was no significant association between methodological quality and the following research characteristics: publication year, continent, whether reporting followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA), preregistration, funding support, randomized controlled trials (RCT) enrollment, whether SR was published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), and whether with meta-analysis. Additionally, subgroup analysis based on interventional SRs/MAs showed that continent was independently associated with the methodological quality of SRs/MAs of CP/CPPS via univariable and multivariate analysis.

conclusionsOur study demonstrates that the methodological quality of SRs/MAs of CP/CPPS was generally poor. SRs/MAs of CP/CPPS should adopt the AMSTAR2 to enhance their methodological quality.

Indexed as

ProstatitisHumansMaleMeta-Analysis as TopicMultivariate AnalysisPelvic PainPublicationsResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicAMSTAR2Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndromeCross-sectional studyMeta-analysisMethodological qualitySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38012566
PMCPMC10680214

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.