| Literature DB >> 27495352 |
Xin Yin Wu1,2,3, Xin Jian Du1, Robin S T Ho1, Clarence C Y Lee1, Benjamin H K Yip1, Martin C S Wong1, Samuel Y S Wong1, Vincent C H Chung1,2,3.
Abstract
Methodological quality of meta-analyses on hypertension treatments can affect treatment decision-making. The authors conducted a cross-sectional study to investigate the methodological quality of meta-analyses on hypertension treatments. One hundred and fifty-eight meta-analyses were identified. Overall, methodological quality was unsatisfactory in the following aspects: comprehensive reporting of financial support (1.9%), provision of included and excluded lists of studies (22.8%), inclusion of grey literature (27.2%), and inclusion of protocols (32.9%). The 126 non-Cochrane meta-analyses had poor performance on almost all the methodological items. Non-Cochrane meta-analyses focused on nonpharmacologic treatments were more likely to consider scientific quality of included studies when making conclusions. The 32 Cochrane meta-analyses generally had good methodological quality except for comprehensive reporting of the sources of support. These results highlight the need for cautious interpretation of these meta-analyses, especially among physicians and policy makers when guidelines are formulated. Future meta-analyses should pay attention to improving these methodological aspects. ©2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27495352 PMCID: PMC8030759 DOI: 10.1111/jch.12889
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) ISSN: 1524-6175 Impact factor: 3.738