COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Einstein (São Paulo) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-45082021000100204 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Objective: To carry out a scoping review of the meta-analyses published regarding about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), evaluating their main characteristics, publication trends and methodological quality. Methods: A bibliometric search was performed in PubMed®, Scopus and Web of Science, focusing on meta-analyses about COVID-2019 disease. Bibliometric and descriptive data for the included articles were extracted and the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses was evaluated using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews. Results: A total of 348 meta-analyses were considered eligible. The first meta-analysis about COVID-19 disease was published on February 26, 2020, and the number of meta-analyses has grown rapidly since then. Most of them were published in infectious disease and virology journals. The greatest number come from China, followed by the United States, Italy and the United Kingdom. On average, these meta-analyses included 23 studies and 15,200 participants. Overall quality was remarkably low, and only 8.9% of them could be considered as of high confidence level. Conclusion: Although well-designed meta-analyses about COVID-19 disease have already been published, the majority are of low quality. Thus, all stakeholders playing a role in COVID-19 deseases, including policy makers, researchers, publishers and journals, should prioritize well-designed meta-analyses, performed only when the background information seem suitable, and discouraging those of low quality or that use suboptimal methods. |
id |
IIEPAE-1_eba733e983ad8fa00dc6b39b297b35c3 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1679-45082021000100204 |
network_acronym_str |
IIEPAE-1 |
network_name_str |
Einstein (São Paulo) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessmentBibliometricsCoronavirusCOVID-19Meta-analysisBetacoronavirusSARS-CoV-2ScientometricsSystematic reviewABSTRACT Objective: To carry out a scoping review of the meta-analyses published regarding about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), evaluating their main characteristics, publication trends and methodological quality. Methods: A bibliometric search was performed in PubMed®, Scopus and Web of Science, focusing on meta-analyses about COVID-2019 disease. Bibliometric and descriptive data for the included articles were extracted and the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses was evaluated using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews. Results: A total of 348 meta-analyses were considered eligible. The first meta-analysis about COVID-19 disease was published on February 26, 2020, and the number of meta-analyses has grown rapidly since then. Most of them were published in infectious disease and virology journals. The greatest number come from China, followed by the United States, Italy and the United Kingdom. On average, these meta-analyses included 23 studies and 15,200 participants. Overall quality was remarkably low, and only 8.9% of them could be considered as of high confidence level. Conclusion: Although well-designed meta-analyses about COVID-19 disease have already been published, the majority are of low quality. Thus, all stakeholders playing a role in COVID-19 deseases, including policy makers, researchers, publishers and journals, should prioritize well-designed meta-analyses, performed only when the background information seem suitable, and discouraging those of low quality or that use suboptimal methods.Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein2021-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-45082021000100204einstein (São Paulo) v.19 2021reponame:Einstein (São Paulo)instname:Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein (IIEPAE)instacron:IIEPAE10.31744/einstein_journal/2021ao6002info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPires,Gabriel NatanBezerra,Andréia GomesOliveira,Thainá Baenninger deChen,Samuel Fen IMalfatti,Victor Davis ApostolakisMello,Victoria Feiner Ferreira deNiyama,AlynePinto,Vitor Luiz SelvaAndersen,Monica LevyTufik,Sergioeng2021-03-11T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1679-45082021000100204Revistahttps://journal.einstein.br/pt-br/ONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||revista@einstein.br2317-63851679-4508opendoar:2021-03-11T00:00Einstein (São Paulo) - Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein (IIEPAE)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment |
title |
COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment |
spellingShingle |
COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment Pires,Gabriel Natan Bibliometrics Coronavirus COVID-19 Meta-analysis Betacoronavirus SARS-CoV-2 Scientometrics Systematic review |
title_short |
COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment |
title_full |
COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment |
title_fullStr |
COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment |
title_full_unstemmed |
COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment |
title_sort |
COVID-19 meta-analyses: a scoping review and quality assessment |
author |
Pires,Gabriel Natan |
author_facet |
Pires,Gabriel Natan Bezerra,Andréia Gomes Oliveira,Thainá Baenninger de Chen,Samuel Fen I Malfatti,Victor Davis Apostolakis Mello,Victoria Feiner Ferreira de Niyama,Alyne Pinto,Vitor Luiz Selva Andersen,Monica Levy Tufik,Sergio |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Bezerra,Andréia Gomes Oliveira,Thainá Baenninger de Chen,Samuel Fen I Malfatti,Victor Davis Apostolakis Mello,Victoria Feiner Ferreira de Niyama,Alyne Pinto,Vitor Luiz Selva Andersen,Monica Levy Tufik,Sergio |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Pires,Gabriel Natan Bezerra,Andréia Gomes Oliveira,Thainá Baenninger de Chen,Samuel Fen I Malfatti,Victor Davis Apostolakis Mello,Victoria Feiner Ferreira de Niyama,Alyne Pinto,Vitor Luiz Selva Andersen,Monica Levy Tufik,Sergio |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Bibliometrics Coronavirus COVID-19 Meta-analysis Betacoronavirus SARS-CoV-2 Scientometrics Systematic review |
topic |
Bibliometrics Coronavirus COVID-19 Meta-analysis Betacoronavirus SARS-CoV-2 Scientometrics Systematic review |
description |
ABSTRACT Objective: To carry out a scoping review of the meta-analyses published regarding about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), evaluating their main characteristics, publication trends and methodological quality. Methods: A bibliometric search was performed in PubMed®, Scopus and Web of Science, focusing on meta-analyses about COVID-2019 disease. Bibliometric and descriptive data for the included articles were extracted and the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses was evaluated using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews. Results: A total of 348 meta-analyses were considered eligible. The first meta-analysis about COVID-19 disease was published on February 26, 2020, and the number of meta-analyses has grown rapidly since then. Most of them were published in infectious disease and virology journals. The greatest number come from China, followed by the United States, Italy and the United Kingdom. On average, these meta-analyses included 23 studies and 15,200 participants. Overall quality was remarkably low, and only 8.9% of them could be considered as of high confidence level. Conclusion: Although well-designed meta-analyses about COVID-19 disease have already been published, the majority are of low quality. Thus, all stakeholders playing a role in COVID-19 deseases, including policy makers, researchers, publishers and journals, should prioritize well-designed meta-analyses, performed only when the background information seem suitable, and discouraging those of low quality or that use suboptimal methods. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-01-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-45082021000100204 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-45082021000100204 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.31744/einstein_journal/2021ao6002 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
einstein (São Paulo) v.19 2021 reponame:Einstein (São Paulo) instname:Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein (IIEPAE) instacron:IIEPAE |
instname_str |
Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein (IIEPAE) |
instacron_str |
IIEPAE |
institution |
IIEPAE |
reponame_str |
Einstein (São Paulo) |
collection |
Einstein (São Paulo) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Einstein (São Paulo) - Instituto Israelita de Ensino e Pesquisa Albert Einstein (IIEPAE) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||revista@einstein.br |
_version_ |
1752129910527229952 |