Analysis of reporting of systematic reviews in physical therapy published in Portuguese

Abstract

Background: Systematic reviews are considered the best design to synthesize all existing information of a given research topic. To date, there is no study that investigated the quality of reporting of systematic reviews relevant to physical therapy published in Portuguese. Objective: To analyse the quality of reporting of systematic reviews in the field of physical therapy published in Portuguese by using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) checklist. Method: All systematic reviews published in Portuguese that were indexed on PEDro database up to August 2011 were included. The quality of reporting of the eligible papers was analysed by using the PRISMA checklist. Each quality assessment was performed by two independent reviewers with arbitration of a third reviewer if necessary. Results: A total of 37 systematic reviews were identified. These studies were published between 2003 and 2010. Less than 30% of the PRISMA checklist items were satisfied, being most of the items related to the introduction and discussion sections. No improvements over time were observed. Conclusions: Most of the studies did not satisfy the items from the PRISMA Checklist. It seems that most of authors did not know the existence of this checklist. The implementation of reporting statements such as the PRISMA statement by Portuguese-written journals is likely to help authors to write their systematic reviews in a more transparent and clear way.

Qualidade metodológica das revisões sistemáticas em periódicos de psicologia brasileiros

“…Um estudo buscou avaliar a apresentação textual de RS em fisioterapia publicadas em português (Padula et al, 2012). Foi adotado o instrumento Prefered Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) composto por 27 itens-guia sobre informações que devem ser claramente descritas no artigo (Liberati et al, 2009).…”

Job rotation designed to prevent musculoskeletal disorders and control risk in manufacturing industries: A systematic review

“…The guidance documents provided examples of outcomes evaluated, information on measurement accuracy, and program timing, as well as other criteria (randomization and participant allocation, sample blinding, dropout rate, and confounding). This information along with previous training, provided the framework and experience to evaluate the internal validity of each study (Padula et al, 2012). …”

Editorial

“…Then came the need to create journals for the dissemination of this knowledge, which now drive the development of science in physiotherapy, also stimulating the development of clinical practice based on best evidence. (2,3) …”

“…In Brazil found 13 journals in the field and 12 courses stricto sensu graduate programs. (8) The scientific production in the area is increasing, (9) being required increasingly more professional clinical work based on the best scientific evidence (3) and a proactive stance by Brazilian teachers in the development of research in the area. (4) The RPF was born in 2011 with a mission to contribute to the development of science and dissemination of scientific knowledge of physiotherapy and related fields.…”