Clinical Epidemiology in China series. Paper 3: The methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published by China' researchers in English-language is higher than those published in Chinese-language

截屏2021-09-02 下午9.38.58.pngRecently, a series of articles from Chinese scholars have been published in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, including: 

l  “Paper 1: Evidence-based medicine in China: an oral history study”.

l  “Paper 2: Promoting GRADE at the national level: the experience from China”.

l  “Paper 3: The methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published by China' researchers in English-language is higher than those published in Chinese-language”.

l  “Paper 4: The reporting and methodological quality of Chinese clinical practice guidelines published between 2014 and 2018: A systematic review”.

 

The key findings of the third study (https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(21)00259-6/fulltext) in the series are as follows:

l  The reporting quality in Chinese-language SRs/MAs was slightly lower than English-language SRs/MAs (mean PRISMA scores: 20.58 vs 21.71 in 2016, 19.87 vs 21.24 in 2017, and 21.29 vs 22.38 in 2018). 

l  The methodological quality in Chinese -language SRs/MAs was also slightly lower than English -language SRs/MAs (mean AMSTAR-2 scores: 8.07 vs 9.36 in 2016; 9.21 vs 10.26 in 2017; 8.86 vs 9.28 in 2018). 

Only one (0.6%) Chinese-language SRs/MA and nine (5.4%) English-language SRs/MAs were rated as high methodological quality.