NDLI: Methodological quality and reporting standards in systematic reviews with meta-analysis of physical activity studies: a report from the Strengthening the Evidence in Exercise Sciences Initiative (SEES Initiative)

Content Provider	Springer Nature : BioMed Central
Author	Oliveira, Nórton Luís Botton, Cíntia Ehlers De Nardi, Angélica Trevisan Umpierre, Daniel
Abstract	Background Several resources have been developed (e.g., reporting guidelines) to promote high-standard practices in health research. However, there was no continuous and systematic assessment of recommended practices in published systematic reviews with meta-analysis (SRMAs), which increases the usability of the available resources. Therefore, we aimed to assess the methodological and reporting standards in SRMAs of physical activity studies. This report presents the main results of the SEES Initiative in 2019. Methods Our approach is based on a prospective systematic review methodology to implement post-publication surveillance of research practices in exercise sciences. Briefly, during the year 2019, pre-specified searches were conducted monthly (PubMed/MEDLINE) in journals from the exercise sciences (n = 9) and medicine (n = 5). The assessments were independently conducted by two authors, based on 36 items/practices derived from established statements/tools (PRISMA, AMSTAR 2, ROBIS). To be eligible, SRMAs should summarize studies that had, at least, one arm consisting of physical activity interventions/exposures and one health or behavioral outcome. Results Out of 1028 studies assessed for eligibility, 103 SRMAs were included. The minimum adherence was 13/36 items, whereas only one SRMA adhered to all items. Some highly contemplated items included identification of title as SRMA (97.1%) and descriptions of the main outcome in the abstract (95.1%) and risk of bias (RoB) assessment (95.1%). Some poorly contemplated items included publicly available protocol (4.9%), discussion of the results in light of RoB in studies included (32.0%), and data sharing statements (35.9%). Conclusion In summary, there is a suboptimal adherence to recommended practices on methodological quality and reporting standards in the SRMAs of physical activity intervention/exposure evaluated from the selected journals in 2019, which likely reduce the reproducibility and usefulness of these studies. This incipient evidence from our first 12 months of post-publication surveillance should serve as a call for attention and action for multiple stakeholders (e.g., authors, reviewers, editors, funders, academic institutions) in this important health research field.
Related Links	https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s13643-021-01845-9.pdf
Ending Page	13
Page Count	13
Starting Page	1
File Format	HTM / HTML
ISSN	20464053
DOI	10.1186/s13643-021-01845-9
Journal	Systematic Reviews
Issue Number	1
Volume Number	10
Language	English
Publisher	BioMed Central
Publisher Date	2021-12-02
Access Restriction	Open
Subject Keyword	Medicine Public Health Biomedicine Statistics for Life Sciences Health Sciences Systematic reviews with meta-analysis Methodological quality Reporting standards Exercise sciences Medicine/Public Health
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Medicine
Journal Impact Factor	6.3/2023
5-Year Journal Impact Factor	4.5/2023

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Systematic review adherence to methodological or reporting quality

Quality of reporting of systematic reviews published in “evidence-based” Chinese journals

Identifying approaches for assessing methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews: a descriptive study

Methodological and reporting quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the association between sleep duration and hypertension

A methodological survey of the analysis, reporting and interpretation of Absolute Risk ReductiOn in systematic revieWs (ARROW): a study protocol

Impact of industry sponsorship on the quality of systematic reviews of vaccines: a cross-sectional analysis of studies published from 2016 to 2019

Generating evidence for diagnosis and therapy of RarE LIVEr disease: the RELIVE Initiative for systematic reviews and meta-analyses

The PRISMATIC project: protocol for a research programme on novel methods to improve reporting and peer review of systematic reviews of health evidence

Exercise for patients with major depression: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Methodological quality and reporting standards in systematic reviews with meta-analysis of physical activity studies: a report from the Strengthening the Evidence in Exercise Sciences Initiative (SEES Initiative)

Similar Documents

Systematic review adherence to methodological or reporting quality

Quality of reporting of systematic reviews published in “evidence-based” Chinese journals

Identifying approaches for assessing methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews: a descriptive study

Methodological and reporting quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the association between sleep duration and hypertension

A methodological survey of the analysis, reporting and interpretation of Absolute Risk ReductiOn in systematic revieWs (ARROW): a study protocol

Impact of industry sponsorship on the quality of systematic reviews of vaccines: a cross-sectional analysis of studies published from 2016 to 2019

Generating evidence for diagnosis and therapy of RarE LIVEr disease: the RELIVE Initiative for systematic reviews and meta-analyses

The PRISMATIC project: protocol for a research programme on novel methods to improve reporting and peer review of systematic reviews of health evidence

Exercise for patients with major depression: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Methodological quality and reporting standards in systematic reviews with meta-analysis of physical activity studies: a report from the Strengthening the Evidence in Exercise Sciences Initiative (SEES Initiative)