Harms Reporting in Systematic Reviews of the Microvascular Free Flap in Head and Neck Reconstruction.
Review published in Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (2023)
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate harms reporting in systematic reviews (SRs) of microvascular free flap (MFF) in head and neck reconstruction. DATA SOURCES: This cross-sectional analysis included searches from the following major databases from 2012 to June 1, 2022: MEDLINE (Pubmed and Ovid), Embase, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. REVIEW METHODS: In a masked duplicate manner, screening was performed using Rayyan, and data were extracted using a pilot-tested Google form. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) was used to appraise the methodological quality of reviews and the corrected covered area was calculated to detect primary study overlap across all reviews. Reviews were then grouped in pairs of 2, called dyads, and the corrected covered area was calculated again for each individual dyad. Dyads with high overlap (≥50%) were further investigated for the accuracy of harms reporting. RESULTS: Our initial search yielded 268 records, with 50 SRs meeting the inclusion criteria. A total of 46 (92%) of the included reviews demonstrated 50% or more adherence to the items assessed in our harms checklist. Our corrected covered area tool revealed 0.6% primary study overlap across all reviews, and 1 dyad with high overlap (≥50%). No statistically significant relationship was observed between the completeness of harms reporting and reviews listing harms as a primary outcome, reviews reporting adherence to Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, or a review's AMSTAR rating. CONCLUSION: This study identifies how harms reporting in SRs of MFF reconstruction of the head and neck can be improved and provides suggestions with the potential to mitigate the paucity in current literature.
Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.
Resumen
To evaluate harms reporting in systematic reviews (SRs) of microvascular free flap (MFF) in head and neck reconstruction. This cross-sectional analysis included searches from the following major databases from 2012 to June 1, 2022: MEDLINE (Pubmed and Ovid), Embase, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane...
Por qué esto importa para la hirudoterapia
Este análisis transversal evaluó la calidad del reporte de daños en 50 revisiones sistemáticas de reconstrucción con colgajos libres microvasculares en cirugía de cabeza y cuello, encontrando que el 92% demostró una adherencia del 50% o mayor a una lista de verificación de reporte de daños, con un 0,6% de superposición de estudios primarios entre las revisiones. El estudio ofrece sugerencias para mejorar el reporte de daños en esta literatura. Este artículo no tiene una relevancia defendible para la hirudoterapia o el secretoma de la sanguijuela; es una evaluación metodológica de cómo se reportan las complicaciones en las revisiones sistemáticas de colgajos libres y no involucra sanguijuelas, compuestos derivados de sanguijuelas ni estrategias de anticoagulación pertinentes al ámbito de ASH.
Citación
Harms Reporting in Systematic Reviews of the Microvascular Free Flap in Head and Neck Reconstruction.
Wilson et al. · Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2023
Contexto clínico relacionado
Explore cómo esta investigación se conecta con la práctica clínica
Añadido a la biblioteca ASH: May 28, 2026 · Última actualización del sitio: 18 de junio de 2026