Journal of the Korea Convergence Society (한국융합학회논문지)

Korea Convergence Society (한국융합학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The evaluation of methodological quality of meta-analysis studies in speech language pathology using AMSTAR

AMSTAR에 기반한 국내 언어치료 분야 메타분석 논문의 방법론적 질평가

  • Han, Minju (Department of Rehabilitation, Granduate School, Honam University) ;
  • Byeon, Haewon (Department of Speech Language Pathology, Honam University)
  • 한민주 (호남대학교 대학원 재활과학과 언어치료전공) ;
  • 변해원 (호남대학교 보건과학대학 언어치료학과)
  • Received : 2019.12.13
  • Accepted : 2020.02.20
  • Published : 2020.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Although research using meta-analysis is increasing in the field of rehabilitation science, not all meta-analytical papers are of the same quality. In particular, although meta-analysis is a research method with the highest level of evidence, it may be possible to derive distorted conclusions or alternatives by simply integrating representative values without considering heterogeneity among individual studies. This study analyzed the current status of meta-analysis papers on the subject of language arbitration published in Korea from January 2010 to June 2019, and used A Measurement Tool to Assess the Methodological Quality of Systematic Review (AMSTAR). As a result of evaluating the methodological quality of the final five papers, the average of 7.4 points out of 11 points was found above average. In order to raise the qualitative level of Meta-analysis in speech-language pathology in the future, it is necessary to include verification of publication bias and specification of conflicts of interest.

재활과학분야에서 메타분석을 이용한 연구가 증가하는 추세이지만 모든 메타분석 논문의 질적 수준이 동일한 것은 아니다. 특히, 메타분석이 가장 상위의 근거수준을 가진 연구방법임에도 불구하고, 개별 연구들 간의 이질성을 고려하지 않고 단순히 대푯값만을 통합할 경우 결과를 왜곡시킬 뿐만 아니라 잘못된 대안을 도출할 가능성이 높다. 본 연구는 2010년 1월부터 2019년 6월까지 우리나라에서 출판된 언어중재를 주제로 한 메타분석 논문을 대상으로 현황을 파악하고, A Measurement Tool to Assess the Methodological Quality of Systematic Review(AMSTAR)를 이용하여 방법론적 질을 평가하였다. 검색된 논문 98편 중 최종 5편 논문의 방법론적 질을 평가한 결과 총점 11점 중에서 평균 7.4점이 산출되어 보통 이상의 수준으로 확인되었다. 향후 언어병리학 메타연구의 질적 수준을 높이기 위해서는 출판편향에 대한 검증과 이해상충에 대한 명시를 포함해야 할 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Y. I. Choi & E. Y. Park. (2014). A Methodological Quality Assessment of Meta-Analyses of Rehabilitation Therapy Areas in Korea. Asia-pacific Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and Sociology, 4(2), 71-78. DOI : 10.14257/AJMAHS.2014.12.06.
  2. E. J. Ahn & H. Kang. (2018). Introduction to systematic review and meta-analysis. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 71(2), 103-112. https://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2018.71.2.103
  3. S. H. Hwang, H. C. Jeong & J. W. Hwang. (2019). Effect of Laughter Therapy on Healthy Life: A Meta-analysis. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 10(9), 291-299. DOI : 10.15207/JKCS.2019.10.9.291
  4. S. H Kim & Y. S. Yang. (2015). A Meta analysis of variables related to Burnout of nurse in korea. Journal of Digital Convergence, 13(8), 387-400. DOI : 10.14400/JDC.2015.13.8.387
  5. D. Moher et al. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1-9. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
  6. H. D. Kim & J. Y. Kim. (2019). Meta-Analysis on the Factors Influencing Job of Life-long Educators. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 10(10), 161-171. DOI : 10.15207/JKCS.2019.10.10.161
  7. B. J. Shea et al. (2007). Development of AMSTAR: Tugwe a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 7(10), 1-7. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-10
  8. S. Y. Kim et al. (2011). NECA's guidance for undertaking systematic reviews and meta-analyses for intervention. Seoul : National Evidence-based healthcare Collaborating Agency.
  9. J. H. Lee, J. U. Lee, I. H. Kim & B. G. Bak. (2013). A Meta-Analysis of The Effect of Picture Book on Early Childhood Development. The Journal of child Education, 22(2), 225-245.
  10. J. H. An & H. I. Cho. (2018). The Meta-Analysis of Therapy Intervention Programs on Linguistic Ability for Intellectual Disabilities. The Journal of child Education, 27(2), 99-125. DOI : 10.17643/KJCE.2018.27.2.06
  11. S. Y. Jeong & S. S. Kim. (2012). Meta-Analysis on the Effects of Communication Programs with Disabilities. Korean Council of Physical, Multiple & Health Disabilities, 55(3), 141-161. DOI : 10.20971/kcpmd.2012.55.3.141
  12. P. Y. Jeong, J. E. Sung & H. S. Sim. (2014). Meta-Analysis of Cognition-Focused Intervention for People with Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia. Communication Sciences and Disorders, 19(2), 199-212. DOI : 14122 https://doi.org/10.12963/csd.14122
  13. M. S. Lee. (2015). Meta-Analysis of Cognitive-linguistic Intervention for Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury. Journal of Special Education & Rehabilitation Science, 54(3), 59-83. DOI : 10.15870/jsers.2015.09.54.3.59
  14. C. G. Ham et al. (2008). good publication pracjournals for medical journals. Korean Association of medical journal Editor [Online]. http://kmbase.medric.or.kr/Uploads/Board/guidelines1.pdf
  15. H. S. Ji & B. I. Choe. (2015). A Study on Institutional Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Research : A National Survey of Korean Academic Medical Centers. Catholic Institute of Bioethics [Online]. http://scholar.dkyobobook.co.kr/searchDownload.laf?barcode=4010024475326&artId=10184792&gb=pdf&rePdf=pdf
  16. E. A. Kim. (2018). A Study on the Legal Policy Problems and Countermeasures about Conflicts of Interest. The Korean society of law and medicine, 19(1), 165-206. DOI : 10.29291/kslm.2018.19.1.165
  17. J. P. Higgins, S. G. Thompson, J. J. Deeks & D. G. Altman. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 327(7414), 557-560. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
  18. H. S. Ahn & H. J. Kim. (2014). An introduction to systematic review. Journal of the Korean Medical Association, 57(1), 49-59. DOI : 10.5124/jkma.2014.57.1.49
  19. S. G. Han, C. M. Shin, B. H. Jang, M. J. Kim, J. E. Park & H. J. Son. (2012). Influence of Publication Bias in Meta-analysis and Systematic Review. seoul : National Evidence-based healthcare Collaborating Agency.
  20. J. Higgins, S. Thompson, J. Deeks & D. Altman. (2002). Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: a critical appraisal of guidelines and practice. Journal of health services research & policy, 7(1), 51-61. DOI : 10.1258/1355819021927674