Mapping the characteristics of meta-analyses of pharmacy services: a systematic review
- PDF / 779,627 Bytes
- 9 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 55 Downloads / 201 Views
REVIEW ARTICLE
Mapping the characteristics of meta‑analyses of pharmacy services: a systematic review Aline F. Bonetti1 · Ana M. Della Rocca1 · Rosa C. Lucchetta1 · Fernanda S. Tonin1 · Fernando Fernandez‐ Llimos2 · Roberto Pontarolo3 Received: 17 October 2019 / Accepted: 11 May 2020 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
Abstract Background: Suboptimal meta-analyses with misleading conclusions are frequently published in the health areas, and they can compromise decision making in clinical practice. Aim of the review: This systematic review aimed to map the characteristics of published meta-analyses of pharmacy services and their association with the study conclusions. Method: We searched electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) to identify published meta-analyses of pharmacy services up to January 2019. Components of meta-analyses were extracted (i.e. studies’ metadata; methods used in the systematic review; description of the statistical model used for the meta-analysis; main results; conflict of interest and funding source). The methodological quality was evaluated using the R-AMSTAR tool. Results: A total of 85 meta-analyses were included, with 2016 as the median publication year. Overall, the methodological quality of meta-analyses of pharmacy services was considered suboptimal. Only one-third of authors registered a protocol; complete search strategy and raw data were provided by 55.3% and 9.4% of studies, respectively. Evidence strength (GRADE) was evaluated in only 19.2% of studies. PRISMA and Cochrane recommendations were stated to be followed in 60% and 27.4% of articles, respectively. Around half of studies performed sensitivity analysis, however, the prediction interval was presented by only one meta-analysis. Studies that favoured the pharmacists’ interventions poorly discussed the methodological quality and heterogeneity of primary trials. Conclusion: Poor conduction and reporting were observed in meta-analyses of pharmacy services, especially in those that favoured the pharmacist’s interventions. Reproducibility and transparency should be rigorously ensured by journal editors and peer-reviewers. Keywords Evidence-based practice · Meta-analysis · Pharmaceutical services · Quality of research
Impacts on Practice
Fernando Fernandez‐Llimos and Roberto Pontarolo are principal investigators in this study. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-020-01058-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. * Fernando Fernandez‐Llimos [email protected] 1
Pharmaceutical Sciences Postgraduate Program, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
2
Laboratory of Pharmacology, Department of Drug Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
3
Department of Pharmacy, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
• High heterogeneity in meta-analyses of pharmacy ser-
vices is limiting the strength of their evidence.
• Meta-analyses of pharmacy services r
Data Loading...
