Aesthetic surgery journal · 2021
Quality of Patient-Reported Outcome Studies Utilizing the BREAST-Q: A Systematic Review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Har-Shai Lior, Ofek Sar-El, Brandstetter Addy, Cohen Keren H, Shay Tamir, Amir Avraham, Ad-El Dean D
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) studies are essential in the assessment of surgical procedures in plastic surgery. One accepted and validated questionnaire is the BREAST-Q.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the quality of PRO studies in plastic surgery utilizing the BREAST-Q questionnaire.
METHODS: This study involved 2 steps: (1) a systematic review of 23 key criteria assessing the quality of survey research in studies utilizing the BREAST-Q that were published between 2015 and 2018; (2) a review of current guidance for survey research in journals related to plastic surgery and breast surgery which were included in the systematic review.
RESULTS: Seventy-nine studies were included in the systematic review. Many key criteria were poorly reported: 51.9% of the studies did not provide a defined response rate and almost 90% did not provide a method for analysis of nonresponse error; 67.1% lacked a description of the sample's representativeness of the population of interest, and 82.3% did not present a sample size calculation. The methods used to analyze data were not described in 11.4% of the papers; in 27.8% the data analysis presented could not allow replication of the results. Of the 16 journals in the fields of plastic surgery and breast surgery for which the "instructions to authors" were reviewed, 15 (93.7%) did not provide any guidance for survey reporting.
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of key criteria are underreported by authors publishing their survey research in peer-reviewed journals in the fields of plastic and breast surgery. There is an urgent need to construct well-developed reporting guidelines for survey research in plastic surgery, and particularly in breast surgery.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the quality of PRO studies in plastic surgery utilizing the BREAST-Q questionnaire.
METHODS: This study involved 2 steps: (1) a systematic review of 23 key criteria assessing the quality of survey research in studies utilizing the BREAST-Q that were published between 2015 and 2018; (2) a review of current guidance for survey research in journals related to plastic surgery and breast surgery which were included in the systematic review.
RESULTS: Seventy-nine studies were included in the systematic review. Many key criteria were poorly reported: 51.9% of the studies did not provide a defined response rate and almost 90% did not provide a method for analysis of nonresponse error; 67.1% lacked a description of the sample's representativeness of the population of interest, and 82.3% did not present a sample size calculation. The methods used to analyze data were not described in 11.4% of the papers; in 27.8% the data analysis presented could not allow replication of the results. Of the 16 journals in the fields of plastic surgery and breast surgery for which the "instructions to authors" were reviewed, 15 (93.7%) did not provide any guidance for survey reporting.
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of key criteria are underreported by authors publishing their survey research in peer-reviewed journals in the fields of plastic and breast surgery. There is an urgent need to construct well-developed reporting guidelines for survey research in plastic surgery, and particularly in breast surgery.