Quality Assessment of Published Systematic Reviews in High Impact Cardiology Journals: Revisiting the Evidence Pyramid
ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 09 June 2021 doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.671569 Quality Assessment of Published Systematic Reviews in High Impact Cardiology Journals: Revisiting the Evidence Pyramid Abdelrahman I. Abushouk 1*, Ismaeel Yunusa 2,3, Ahmed O. Elmehrath 4, Abdelmagid M. Elmatboly 5, Shady Hany Fayek 4, Omar M. Abdelfattah 6, Anas Saad 1, Toshiaki Isogai 1, Shashank Shekhar 1, Ankur Kalra 1, Grant W. Reed 1, Rishi Puri 1 and Samir Kapadia 1 1 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart, Vascular & Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, United States, 2 Harvard T.H Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, United States, 3 Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, University of South Carolina College of Pharmacy, Columbia, SC, United States, 4 Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt, 5 Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt, 6 Department of Internal Medicine, Morristown Medical Center, Morristown, NJ, United States Edited by: Jinwei Tian, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Objective: Systematic reviews are increasingly used as sources of evidence in clinical Harbin Medical University, China cardiology guidelines. In the present study, we aimed to assess the quality of published Reviewed by: Luiz Felipe Pinho Moreira, systematic reviews in high impact cardiology journals. University of São Paulo, Brazil Methods: We searched PubMed for systematic reviews published between 2010 Fernando Fernandez-Llimos, University of Porto, Portugal and 2019 in five general cardiology journals with the highest impact factor (according Zhuozhong Wang, to Clarivate Analytics 2019). We extracted data on eligibility criteria, methodological The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, China characteristics, bias assessments, and sources of funding.
[Show full text]