Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analysis with protocols in Diabetes Mellitus Type II: A systematic review

Abstract

Background Systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses (SR/MAs) are strongly encouraged to work from a protocol to facilitate high quality, transparent methodology. The completeness of reporting of a protocol (PRISMA-P) and manuscript (PRISMA) is essential to the quality appraisal (AMSTAR-2) and appropriate use of SR/MAs in making treatment decisions. Objectives The objectives of this study were to describe the completeness of reporting and quality of SR/MAs, assess the correlations between PRISMA-P, PRISMA, and AMSTAR-2, and to identify reporting characteristics between similar items of PRISMA-P and PRISMA. Methods We performed a systematic review of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus SR/MAs of hypoglycemic agents with publicly available protocols. Cochrane reviews, guidelines, and specific types of MA were excluded. Two reviewers independently, (i) searched PubMed and Embase between 1/1/2015 to 20/3/2019; (ii) identified protocols of included studies by searching the manuscript bibliography, supplementary material, PROSPERO, and Google; (iii) completed PRISMA-P, PRISMA, and AMSTAR-2 tools. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, and multivariable linear regression. Results Of 357 relevant SR/MAs, 51 had available protocols and were included. The average score for PRISMA-P was 15.8±3.3 (66%; maximum 24) and 25.2±1.1 (93%; maximum 27) for PRISMA. The quality of SR/MAs assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool identified an overall poor quality (63% critically low, 18% low, 8% moderate, 12% high). The correlation between the PRISMA-P and PRISMA was not significant (r = 0.264; p = 0.06). Correlation was significant between PRISMA-P and AMSTAR-2 (r = 0.333; p = 0.02) and PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 (r = 0.555; p<0.01). Discrepancies in reporting were common between similar PRISMA-P and PRISMA items. Conclusion Adherence to protocol reporting guidance was poor while manuscript reporting was comprehensive. Protocol completeness is not associated with a completely reported manuscript. Independently, PRISMA-P and PRISMA scores were weakly associated with higher quality assessments but insufficient as a surrogate for quality. Critical areas for quality improvement include protocol description, investigating causes of heterogeneity, and the impact of risk of bias on the evidence synthesis.

Mortality of Diabetes-related Acute Metabolic Emergencies in COVID-19 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…The major limitation of the present study might be dual: first, the combination of data from different kind of studies, namely two case report series, one case-control study, and one meta-analysis of 41 case reports; second, the very small number of studies included. However, as the topic is totally novel, any study that respects adherence to protocol followed, investigates causes of heterogeneity, and assesses the impact of risk of bias on the evidence synthesis might be valuable [24].…”

Acute Metabolic Emergencies in Diabetes and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case reports

“…Comparison between studies of USA and non-USA origin; between absence and presence of mixed ketotic and hyperosmotic state; within age, body mass index (BMI), and HbA1c (treated either as continuous or binary variables); between absence or presence of prior administration of various antidiabetic agents including insulin, metformin, sulfonylureas, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), glucagon-like peptide- 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i), and pioglitazone; between absence and presence of comorbidities including T1D/T2D, arterial hypertension (AH), hyperlipidemia, coronary artery disease (CAD), asthma; within number of comorbidities, days from onset of symptoms, disease severity expressed as disease status, C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, d-dimers, glucose, osmolality, arterial pH, bicarbonates, ketones, lactates, β-hydroxybutyric acid (β-HB), and anion gap (treated either as continuous or binary variables); and between absence or presence of acute kidney injury (AKI), and Outcome (survival/discharge vs. death) was performed. AMSTAR 2 checklist was used to assess the quality of the present study [23,24].…”

Management of Diabetes Mellitus With Traditional Ayurvedic Herbs: A Review

“…Journal of Advanced Scientific Research, 2022; 13 (7): Aug.-2022 producer of medicinal plants. The current study focuses on herbal medicinal preparations and plants used to treat diabetes mellitus, a terrible disease that costs billions of dollars worldwide [5].…”

“…In the vast majority of cases, the cause of this kind of diabetes is unknown. Tissue insulin sensitivity has been seen in the majority of Type 2 patients, independent of weight, and has been connected to a variety of factors [7]. The pancreatic cells' response to glucose is also reduced.…”

“…Malvaceae); often known as okra, is used to treat diabetes mellitus. It belongs to the mallow family and is Journal of Advanced Scientific Research, 2022; 13 (7): Aug.-2022 a blooming plant. Its delicious green seed pods are prized.…”