Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30051140›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2019

Epidemiology of systematic reviews in imaging journals: evaluation of publication trends and sustainability?

M Alabousi, A Alabousi, T A McGrath, K D Cobey, B Budhram, R A Frank, F Nguyen, J P Salameh, A Dehmoobad Sharifabadi, M D F McInnes

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Prevalence Of Review Studies Published In Rehabilitation Journals During The Last Decade.Journal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

M AlabousiDepartment of Radiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
A AlabousiDepartment of Radiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
T A McGrathFaculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
K D CobeyCentre for Journalology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontorio, Canada.
B BudhramFaculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
R A FrankFaculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
F NguyenFaculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
J P SalamehSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
A Dehmoobad SharifabadiFaculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
M D F McInnesUniversity of Ottawa Department of Radiology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Room c159 Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus, 1053 Carling Ave., Ottawa, ON, K1Y 4E9, Canada. mmcinnes@toh.on.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8404-4075

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the epidemiology of systematic reviews (SRs) published in imaging journals.

methodsA MEDLINE search identified SRs published in imaging journals from 1 January 2000-31 December 2016. Articles retrieved were screened against inclusion criteria. Demographic and methodological characteristics were extracted from studies. Temporal trends were evaluated using linear regression and Pearson's correlation coefficients.

results921 SRs were included that reported on 27,435 primary studies, 85,276,484 patients and were cited 26,961 times. The SR publication rate increased 23-fold (r=0.92, p<0.001) while the proportion of SRs to non-SRs increased 13-fold (r = 0.94, p<0.001) from 2000 (0.10%) to 2016 (1.33%). Diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) SRs were most frequent (46.5%) followed by therapeutic SRs (16.6%). Most SRs did not report funding status (54.2%). The median author team size was five; this increased over time (r=0.20, p<0.001). Of the studies, 67.3% included an imaging specialist co-author; this decreased over time (r=-0.57, p=0.017). Most SRs included a meta-analysis (69.6%). Journal impact factor positively correlated with SR publication rates (r=0.54, p<0.001). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 'vascular and interventional radiology' were the most frequently studied imaging modality and subspecialty, respectively. The USA, UK, China, Netherlands and Canada were the top five publishing countries.

conclusionsThe SR publication rate is increasing rapidly compared with the rate of growth of non-SRs; however, they still make up just over 1% of all studies. Authors, reviewers and editors should be aware of methodological and reporting standards specific to imaging systematic reviews including those for DTA and individual patient data. KEY POINTS: • Systematic review publication rate has increased 23-fold from 2000-2016. • The proportion of systematic reviews to non-systematic reviews has increased 13-fold. • The USA, UK and China are the most frequent published countries; those from the USA and China are increasing the most rapidly.

Indexed as

Review Literature as TopicBibliometricsDiagnostic ImagingHumansJournal Impact FactorPeriodicals as TopicPublishingDiagnostic imaging/trendsEpidemiology/methods and epidemiology/trendsMeta-analysisPublications/trendsResearch design/trends

Identifiers

PMID30051140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.