대한간호학회지 (Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing)

한국간호과학회 (Korean Society of Nursing Science)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

국내 간호학 분야 메타분석 논문의 질 평가

A Quality Assessment of Meta-Analyses of Nursing in South Korea

  • Kim, Jung-Hee (Department of Nursing, College of Medicine, Dankook University) ;
  • Kim, Ae-Kyung (Department of Nursing, College of Medicine, Dankook University)
  • 투고 : 2013.06.25
  • 심사 : 2013.10.25
  • 발행 : 2013.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to assess the quality of meta-analyses on nursing published in South Korea. Methods: Relevant meta-analyses were identified through searches of the National Assembly Library, KISS (Korean Studies Information Service System), and the DBpia and RISS4U databases from 1990 to May 2013. Quality assessments were conducted using AMSTAR, a validated tool for assessing the quality of systematic reviews. Results: Forty-two meta-analyses were included in this study. Twenty-nine published between 1990 and 2010, and 13, between 2011 and May 2013. Two high quality studies and 11 moderate quality studies were published in the latter period. The mean score for the reviews was 5.61 (range 3-10); 11 studies were rated as low quality, 29 as moderate quality, and two as high quality. Conclusion: Although an improvement in the quality of meta-analyses conducted by nursing researchers in South Korea was observed across the study period, the study results indicate a need to use of more rigorous research methods when conducting systematic reviews or meta-analyses.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
  2. Braga, L. H., Pemberton, J., Demaria, J., & Lorenzo, A. J. (2011). Methodological concerns and quality appraisal of contemporary systematic reviews and meta-analyses in pediatric urology. The Journal of Urology, 186(1), 266-271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.03.044
  3. Brown, S. J. (2013). Evidence-based nursing: The research-practice connection (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
  4. Conn, V. S., & Rantz, M. J. (2003). Research methods: Managing primary study quality in meta-analyses. Research in Nursing & Health, 26(4), 322-333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/nur.10092
  5. Craig, J. V., & Smyth, R. L. (2007). The evidence-based practice manual for nurses (2nd ed.). Edinburgh, UK: Churchill Livingstone.
  6. De Vito, C., Manzoli, L., Marzuillo, C., Anastasi, D., Boccia, A., & Villari, P. (2007). A systematic review evaluating the potential for bias and the methodological quality of meta-analyses in vaccinology. Vaccine, 25(52), 8794-8806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.10.034
  7. Dijkman, B. G., Abouali, J. A., Kooistra, B. W., Conter, H. J., Poolman, R. W., Kulkarni, A. V., et al. (2010). Twenty years of meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery: Has quality kept up with quantity? The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume, 92(1), 48-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.i.00251
  8. Egger, M., & Smith, G. D. (1998). Bias in location and selection of studies. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 316(7124), 61-66. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7124.61
  9. Egger, M., Smith, G. D., & Altman, D. G. (2001). Systematic reviews in health care: Meta-analysis in context (2nd ed.). London, UK: BMJ Books.
  10. Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (2011, March). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. Retrieved December 1, 2011, from www.cochrane-handbook.org
  11. Kim, S. Y., Park, J. E., Seo, H. J., Lee, Y. J., Jang, B. H., Son, H. J., et al. (2011). NECA's guidance for undertaking systematic reviews and meta-analyses for intervention. Seoul: National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency.
  12. Kjaergard, L. L., Villumsen, J., & Gluud, C. (2001). Reported methodologic quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses. Annals of Internal Medicine, 135(11), 982-989. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-135-11-200112040-00010
  13. Leandro, G. (2005). Meta-analysis in medical research: The handbook for the understanding and practice of meta-analysis. Malden, MA: BMJ Books.
  14. Lee, J. (2008). Meta-analysis. Journal of Korean Endocrine Society, 23(6), 361-378. http://dx.doi.org/10.3803/jkes.2008.23.6.361
  15. Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., et al. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(10), e1-e34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006
  16. Lim, S. M., Shin, E. S., Lee, S. H., Seo, K. H., Jung, Y. M., & Jang, J. E. (2011). Tools for assessing quality and risk of bias by levels of evidence. Journal of the Korean Medical Association, 54(4), 419-429. http://dx.doi.org/10.5124/jkma.2011.54.4.419
  17. MacDonald, S. L., Canfield, S. E., Fesperman, S. F., & Dahm, P. (2010). Assessment of the methodological quality of systematic reviews published in the urological literature from 1998 to 2008. The Journal of Urology, 184(2), 648-653. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.03.127
  18. Melchiors, A. C., Correr, C. J., Venson, R., & Pontarolo, R. (2012). An analysis of quality of systematic reviews on pharmacist health interventions. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, 34(1), 32-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11096-011-9592-0
  19. Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., & Stroup, D. F. (1999). Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet, 354(9193), 1896-1900. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04149-5
  20. Papageorgiou, S. N., Papadopoulos, M. A., & Athanasiou, A. E. (2011). Evaluation of methodology and quality characteristics of systematic reviews in orthodontics. Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research, 14(3), 116-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2011.01522.x
  21. Shea, B. J., Grimshaw, J. M., Wells, G. A., Boers, M., Andersson, N., Hamel, C., et al. (2007). Development of AMSTAR: A measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 7, 10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-7-10
  22. Shea, B. J., Hamel, C., Wells, G. A., Bouter, L. M., Kristjansson, E., Grimshaw, J., et al. (2009). AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(10), 1013-1020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009
  23. Shin, C., Han, C., Pae, C. U., & Patkar, A. A. (2011). Tools for quality evaluation of clinical research reports. Korean Journal of Psychopharmacology, 22(2), 67-72.
  24. Simes, R. J. (1987). Confronting publication bias: A cohort design for metaanalysis. Statistics in Medicine, 6(1), 11-29. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780060104
  25. Song, F., Eastwood, A. J., Gilbody, S., Duley, L., & Sutton, A. J. (2000). Publication and related biases. Health Technology Assessment (Winchester, England), 4(10), 1-115.
  26. Stroup, D. F., Berlin, J. A., Morton, S. C., Olkin, I., Williamson, G. D., Rennie, D., et al. (2000). Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 283(15), 2008-2012. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.283.15.2008
  27. Suebnukarn, S., Ngamboonsirisingh, S., & Rattanabanlang, A. (2010). A systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in endodontics. Journal of Endodontics, 36(4), 602-608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.12.019
  28. Sutton, A. J., Abrams, K. R., Jones, D. R., Sheldon, T. A., & Song, F. (2000). Methods for meta-analysis in medical research. New York, NY: Wiley.

피인용 문헌

  1. 국내 운동 관련 메타분석 논문의 질 평가 vol.44, pp.5, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2014.44.5.459
  2. 입원 환자 낙상예방 간호중재 효과에 대한 메타분석 vol.45, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4040/jkan.2015.45.4.469
  3. AMSTAR를 활용한 국내 한의학 관련 체계적 문헌고찰 논문의 질 평가 vol.13, pp.10, 2013, https://doi.org/10.14400/jdc.2015.13.10.549
  4. 국내 사회복지 관련 메타분석 연구의 질 평가 vol.17, pp.10, 2013, https://doi.org/10.5762/kais.2016.17.10.158
  5. Recent Research Trends in Meta-analysis vol.11, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anr.2017.05.004
  6. 국내 근거기반간호연구의 동향 vol.23, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2017.23.4.385
  7. Methodological Quality Assessment of Meta-Analyses in the Field of Korean Occupational Therapy Using the Korean Journal of Occupational Therapy vol.28, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.14519/kjot.2020.28.3.06