What Proportion of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Published in the Annals of Surgery Provide Definitive Conclusions—A Systematic Review and Bibliometric Analysis

Matthew G. Davey, Martin S. Davey, Aoife J. Lowery and Michael J. Kerin
Additional contact information
Matthew G. Davey: Discipline of Surgery, The Lambe Institution of Translational Research, National University of Ireland, H91 YR71 Galway, Ireland
Martin S. Davey: Department of Surgery, Galway University Hospitals, H91 YR71 Galway, Ireland
Aoife J. Lowery: Discipline of Surgery, The Lambe Institution of Translational Research, National University of Ireland, H91 YR71 Galway, Ireland
Michael J. Kerin: Discipline of Surgery, The Lambe Institution of Translational Research, National University of Ireland, H91 YR71 Galway, Ireland

Publications, 2022, vol. 10, issue 2, 1-7

Abstract: Objective: To perform a systematic review and bibliometric analysis of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in the Annals of Surgery during a 10-year eligibility period and determine the unambiguity of concluding statements of these reviews published in the journal. Background: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses integrate clinically pertinent results from several studies to replicate large-volume, ‘real world’ scenarios. While the assimilation of results from multiple high-quality trials are at the summit of the evidence-base, the increasing prevalence of reviews using low-to-moderate levels of evidence (LOE) limit the ability to make evidence-based conclusions. In surgery, increasing LOE are typically associated with publication in the highest impact surgical journals (e.g., Annals of Surgery ). Methods: A systematic review was performed as per PRISMA guidelines. An electronic search of the Annals of Surgery for articles published between 2011 and 2020 was conducted. Descriptive statistics were used. Results: In total, 186 systematic reviews (with or without meta-analyses) were published in the Annals of Surgery between 2011 and 2020 (131 systematic reviews with meta-analyses (70.4%) and 55 without meta-analyses (29.6%)). Study data were from 22,656,192 subjects. In total, 94 studies were from European research institutes (50.5%) and 58 were from North American institutes (31.2%). Overall, 75.3% of studies provided conclusive statements (140/186). Year of publication ( P = 0.969), country of publication ( P = 0.971), region of publication ( P = 0.416), LOE ( P = 0.342), surgery performed ( P = 0.736), and two-year impact factor (IF) ( P = 0.251) failed to correlate with conclusive statements. Of note, 80.9% (106/131) of meta-analyses and 61.8% of systematic reviews (34/55) provided conclusive statements ( P = 0.009, †). Conclusions: Over 75% of systematic reviews published in the Annals of Surgery culminated in conclusive statements. Interestingly, meta-analyses were more likely to provide conclusive statements than systematic reviews, while LOE and IF failed to do so.

Keywords: systematic review; meta-analysis; academic surgery (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A2 D83 L82 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/10/2/19/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/10/2/19/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:10:y:2022:i:2:p:19-:d:804161

Access Statistics for this article

Publications is currently edited by Ms. Jennifer Zhang

More articles in Publications from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().