Quality Appraisal of Systematic Reviews on the Efficacy and Safety of
Labour Induction Methods: Systematic Review.
Background: The induction of labour has been increasing over the last
decade. It is most often indicated when the safety of the baby or mother
may be compromised. Objectives: This study aims to assess the quality of
systematic reviews that examined the efficacy and/or safety of various
methods of induction of labour. Search Strategy: An electronic database
search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted. The
search strategy can be found in the online supplement. Selection
Criteria: Systematic reviews that examined various methods of induction
of labour. Inclusion and exclusion criteria can be found in the main
text. Data Collection and Analysis: Study characteristics such as
journal and impact factor, year of publication, source of funding,
citation rate, etc. were retrieved. Quality assessment was conducted
using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Main
Results: There were no significant relationships between mean AMSTAR
score and number of citations (p=0.0875, r=0.25; 95% CI, -0.04 to
0.50), journal impact factor (p=0.2959, r=-0.15; 95% CI, -0.42 to
0.14), or publication year (p=0.5827, r=0.08; 95% CI, -0.20 to 0.36).
Cochrane studies on average scored higher than non-Cochrane studies
(p=0.01). No significant differences were detected between the AMSTAR
scores of government and non-government funded studies (p=0.34).
Conclusions: Better adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for
Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and for peer reviewers to
appraise new systematic reviews with methodological assessment tools
would enhance confidence in review conclusions.