Reporting quality of abstracts of systematic reviews/meta-analyses: An appraisal of Arab Journal of Urology across 12 years: the PRISMA-Abstracts checklist. Issue 1 (2nd January 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: El Ansari, Walid; AlRumaihi, Khalid; El-Ansari, Kareem; Arafa, Mohamed; Elbardisi, Haitham; Majzoub, Ahmad; Shamsodini, Ahmad; Al Ansari, Abdulla
• Is Part Of: Arab journal of urology. Volume 21:Issue 1(2023)
• Page Start: 52
• Page End: 65
• Publication Date: 2023-01-02
• Subjects: Reporting quality -- systematic review -- Meta-analysis -- urology -- abstract -- PRISMA-abstract; Urology -- Periodicals; Urology; Urologic Diseases; Urologic Surgical Procedures; Urogenital Neoplasms; Arabia; Periodicals; 616.6
• DOI: 10.1080/2090598X.2022.2113127
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2090-598X

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Objective: We appraised the reporting quality of abstracts of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (SR/MAs) published in one urology journal and explored associations between abstract characteristics and completeness of reporting. Methods: The Arab Journal of Urology (AJU) was searched for SR/MAs published between January 2011 and 31 May 2022. SR/MAs with structured abstract and quantitative synthesis were eligible. Two reviewers simultaneously together selected the SR/MAs by title, screened the abstracts, and included those based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data of a range of characteristics were extracted from each SR/MAs into a spreadsheet. To gauge completeness of reporting, the PRISMA-Abstract checklist (12 items) was used to appraise the extent to which abstracts adhered to the checklist. For each abstract, we computed item, section, and overall adherence. Chi-square and t-tests compared the adherence scores. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified the abstract characteristics associated with overall adherence. Results: In total, 66 SR/MAs published during the examined period; 62 were included. Partial reporting was not uncommon. In terms of adherence to the 12 PRISMA-A items were: two items exhibited 100% adherence (title, objectives); five items had 80% to <100% adherence (interpretation, included studies, synthesis of results, eligibility criteria, and information sources); two items displayed 40% to <80% adherence (description of the effect, strengths/limitations of evidence); and three items had adherence that fell between 0% and 1.6% (risk of bias, funding/conflict of interest, registration). Multivariable regression revealed two independent predictors of overall adherence: single-country authorship (i.e. no collaboration) was associated with higher overall adherence ( P = 0.046); and abstracts from South America were associated with lower overall adherence ( P = 0.04). Conclusion: This study is the first to appraise abstracts of SR/MAs in urology. For high-quality abstracts, improvements are needed in the quality of reporting. Adoption/better adherence to PRISMA-A checklist by editors/authors could improve the reporting quality and completeness of SR/MAs abstracts.