FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2521539690> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2521539690 endingPage "185" @default.
• W2521539690 startingPage "185" @default.
• W2521539690 abstract "INTRODUCTION: As medicine becomes increasingly evidence-based, it is crucial to understand the level of evidence informing healthcare decisions. Systematic reviews are thought to provide high-quality evidence, but they vary markedly in methodological rigor. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) was created in 2007 to evaluate scientific quality using an 11-item scale. Studies are classified as high (scoring 8–11), medium (4–7), or low quality (0–3). The following investigation uses AMSTAR criteria to assess the quality of systematic reviews in the plastic surgery literature. METHODS: PubMED and Web of Science electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews of diagnostic or management interventions published from January 2000-August 2015 in the 13 highest-impact plastic surgery journals. Narrative reviews, discussion articles, reviews without transparent search criteria, and reviews of disease prevalence or research methodology were excluded. Two reviewers (HEJ, BBM, or JL) independently screened titles and abstracts for inclusion. Full texts for the included abstracts were screened, and included studies were rated according to AMSTAR guidelines. Discrepancies were resolved through discussion. Mean AMSTAR score was calculated for each included journal with ≥1 included review, ANOVA compared each journal’s mean AMSTAR score, and an independent-sample T-test compared mean AMSTAR scores prior to and after AMSTAR creation. RESULTS: The database search identified 807 non-duplicate reviews. 410 were excluded on title and abstract review and 92 on manuscript review, leaving 305 reviews eligible for AMSTAR rating. AMSTAR scores ranged from 0–10, with a mean of 4.60 (SD 2.18). Mean scores per journal differed significantly (p=0.008), with the highest attributed to the Journal of Craniofacial Surgery and the Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive, and Aesthetic Surgery (5.88 and 5.41, respectively). Interrupted time series revealed that introduction of AMSTAR criteria in 2007 did not change average AMSTAR scores. The most commonly met criteria were the presence of a priori inclusion and exclusion criteria (96.1%) and duplicate data extraction (58.0%), while the criteria most often missed were stating conflict of interest for all included studies (2.6%) and inclusion of a list of both included and excluded studies (9.5%). DISCUSSION: Significant heterogeneity exists in the quality of systematic reviews published in the plastic surgery literature. Understanding the limitations of the current literature enables future opportunities to increase the quality of systematic reviews guiding clinical decision-making." @default.
• W2521539690 created "2016-09-30" @default.
• W2521539690 creator A5007517753 @default.
• W2521539690 creator A5066568933 @default.
• W2521539690 creator A5081076437 @default.
• W2521539690 creator A5089265388 @default.
• W2521539690 date "2016-09-01" @default.
• W2521539690 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2521539690 title "Abstract" @default.
• W2521539690 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/01.gox.0000503137.19247.9a" @default.
• W2521539690 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
• W2521539690 type Work @default.
• W2521539690 sameAs 2521539690 @default.
• W2521539690 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2521539690 countsByYear W25215396902022 @default.
• W2521539690 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2521539690 hasAuthorship W2521539690A5007517753 @default.
• W2521539690 hasAuthorship W2521539690A5066568933 @default.
• W2521539690 hasAuthorship W2521539690A5081076437 @default.
• W2521539690 hasAuthorship W2521539690A5089265388 @default.
• W2521539690 hasBestOaLocation W25215396901 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConcept C189708586 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConcept C19527891 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConcept C2779473830 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConceptScore W2521539690C189708586 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConceptScore W2521539690C19527891 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConceptScore W2521539690C2779473830 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConceptScore W2521539690C512399662 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConceptScore W2521539690C55493867 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConceptScore W2521539690C71924100 @default.
• W2521539690 hasConceptScore W2521539690C86803240 @default.
• W2521539690 hasLocation W25215396901 @default.
• W2521539690 hasLocation W25215396902 @default.
• W2521539690 hasOpenAccess W2521539690 @default.
• W2521539690 hasPrimaryLocation W25215396901 @default.
• W2521539690 hasRelatedWork W2115099528 @default.
• W2521539690 hasRelatedWork W3029969037 @default.
• W2521539690 hasRelatedWork W3083696963 @default.
• W2521539690 hasRelatedWork W3167030926 @default.
• W2521539690 hasRelatedWork W4220654564 @default.
• W2521539690 hasRelatedWork W4226214019 @default.
• W2521539690 hasRelatedWork W4230570618 @default.
• W2521539690 hasRelatedWork W4249380099 @default.
• W2521539690 hasRelatedWork W4323074912 @default.
• W2521539690 hasRelatedWork W2263133331 @default.
• W2521539690 hasVolume "4" @default.
• W2521539690 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2521539690 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2521539690 magId "2521539690" @default.
• W2521539690 workType "article" @default.