Reliability of the evidence to guide decision-making in foot ulcer prevention in diabetes: an overview of systematic reviews

系统回顾 心理干预 医学 梅德林 科克伦图书馆 批判性评价 循证医学 随机对照试验 循证实践 灰色文学 替代医学 家庭医学 重症监护医学 外科 护理部 病理 法学 政治学
作者
Fay Crawford,Donald Nicolson,Aparna Amanna,Marie Smith
出处
期刊:BMC Medical Research Methodology [BioMed Central]
卷期号:22 (1) 被引量:2
标识
DOI:10.1186/s12874-022-01738-y
摘要

Reliable evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to prevent diabetes-related foot ulceration is essential to inform clinical practice. Well-conducted systematic reviews that synthesise evidence from all relevant trials offer the most robust evidence for decision-making. We conducted an overview to assess the comprehensiveness and utility of the available secondary evidence as a reliable source of robust estimates of effect with the aim of informing a cost-effective care pathway using an economic model. Here we report the details of the overview. [PROSPERO Database (CRD42016052324)].Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Epistomonikos, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE), and the Health Technology Assessment Journals Library were searched to 17th May 2021, without restrictions, for systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of preventive interventions in people with diabetes. The primary outcomes of interest were new primary or recurrent foot ulcers. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the included reviews.The overview identified 30 systematic reviews of patient education, footwear and off-loading, complex and other interventions. Many are poorly reported and have fundamental methodological shortcomings associated with increased risk of bias. Most concerns relate to vague inclusion criteria (60%), weak search or selection strategies (70%) and quality appraisal methods (53%) and inexpert conduct and interpretation of quantitative and narrative evidence syntheses (57%). The 30 reviews have collectively assessed 26 largely poor-quality RCTs with substantial overlap.The majority of these systematic reviews of the effectiveness of interventions to prevent diabetic foot ulceration are at high risk of bias and fail to provide reliable evidence for decision-making. Adherence to the core principles of conducting and reporting systematic reviews is needed to improve the reliability of the evidence generated to inform clinical practice.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
实验好难应助aiueo采纳,获得10
刚刚
hachi完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
刚刚
仁爱的谷南完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
2秒前
together73W完成签到 ,获得积分10
2秒前
大秋哥哈拉少完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
3秒前
豆腐青菜雨应助不穷知识采纳,获得10
4秒前
yxy发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
5秒前
边佳佳发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
科研通AI5应助辉hui采纳,获得10
7秒前
鹏程发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
8秒前
紫泠榭发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
我是老大应助tg2024采纳,获得10
8秒前
9秒前
9秒前
可爱的函函应助孤独夜安采纳,获得10
10秒前
芝士椰果完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
10秒前
lan发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
11秒前
善良过客完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
Hh完成签到 ,获得积分10
12秒前
张萌发布了新的文献求助30
12秒前
aiueo发布了新的文献求助10
13秒前
qifeng完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
CH发布了新的文献求助10
14秒前
14秒前
16秒前
木林森林木完成签到 ,获得积分10
17秒前
羊小旸完成签到,获得积分10
17秒前
完美世界应助sudaxia100采纳,获得10
19秒前
20秒前
20秒前
kingdomjust完成签到,获得积分10
22秒前
22秒前
babyJ完成签到,获得积分10
23秒前
高分求助中
【此为提示信息,请勿应助】请按要求发布求助,避免被关 20000
Production Logging: Theoretical and Interpretive Elements 3000
CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 104th edition 1000
Gay and Lesbian Asia 1000
Density Functional Theory: A Practical Introduction, 2nd Edition 840
J'AI COMBATTU POUR MAO // ANNA WANG 660
Izeltabart tapatansine - AdisInsight 600
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 工程类 有机化学 物理 生物化学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 内科学 复合材料 物理化学 电极 遗传学 量子力学 基因 冶金 催化作用
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3759125
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3302180
关于积分的说明 10121269
捐赠科研通 3016580
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1656512
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 790521
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 753886