Abstract：
The prospective registration of systematic reviews represent an effective strategy for reducing the selective reporting of outcomes. However, the relationship between registration and the reporting quality of systematic reviews on surgical interventions remains unclear.
MEDLINE was searched for relevant systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials investigating surgical interventions published in 2020. Data concerning general characteristics and registration information were independently extracted. The reporting quality was evaluated in accordance with pre-established evaluation criteria. Univariate and multivariate linear regression were performed to identify factors associated with improved reporting quality.
A total of 135 systematic reviews were analyzed, of which 50 (37%) were registered. Registered systematic reviews achieved a significantly higher compliance rate on all items compared with non-registered reviews. Registered reviews also demonstrated significantly higher proportions of the reporting of seven items. Multivariate regression analysis showed that registration status and funding support were associated with better reporting quality.
Although prospective registration associates with higher reporting quality in systematic reviews, the number of prospective registrations remains low. Therefore, prospective registration should be encouraged among authors, peer reviewers, and journal editors, as well as institutions, to enhance the value of systematic reviews in evidence-based surgical practice.
MEDLINE was searched for relevant systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials investigating surgical interventions published in 2020. Data concerning general characteristics and registration information were independently extracted. The reporting quality was evaluated in accordance with pre-established evaluation criteria. Univariate and multivariate linear regression were performed to identify factors associated with improved reporting quality.
A total of 135 systematic reviews were analyzed, of which 50 (37%) were registered. Registered systematic reviews achieved a significantly higher compliance rate on all items compared with non-registered reviews. Registered reviews also demonstrated significantly higher proportions of the reporting of seven items. Multivariate regression analysis showed that registration status and funding support were associated with better reporting quality.
Although prospective registration associates with higher reporting quality in systematic reviews, the number of prospective registrations remains low. Therefore, prospective registration should be encouraged among authors, peer reviewers, and journal editors, as well as institutions, to enhance the value of systematic reviews in evidence-based surgical practice.
摘要：
系统评价的前瞻性登记是减少选择性结果报告的有效策略。然而,登记与外科干预系统评价报告质量之间的关系尚不清楚.
在MEDLINE中搜索了2020年发表的关于外科手术干预的随机对照试验的相关系统评价。独立提取有关一般特征和注册信息的数据。报告质量按照预先建立的评价标准进行评价。进行单变量和多元线性回归以确定与报告质量改善相关的因素。
共分析了135篇系统综述，其中50人(37%)登记。与未注册的审查相比，注册的系统审查在所有项目上的遵守率都高得多。登记审查还表明，七个项目的报告比例高得多。多因素回归分析显示，注册状态和资金支持与更好的报告质量相关。
尽管前瞻性注册与系统评价中更高的报告质量相关，预期注册的数量仍然很低。因此,应鼓励作者进行前瞻性注册，同行审稿人,和期刊编辑，以及机构，提高系统评价在循证外科实践中的价值。
在MEDLINE中搜索了2020年发表的关于外科手术干预的随机对照试验的相关系统评价。独立提取有关一般特征和注册信息的数据。报告质量按照预先建立的评价标准进行评价。进行单变量和多元线性回归以确定与报告质量改善相关的因素。
共分析了135篇系统综述，其中50人(37%)登记。与未注册的审查相比，注册的系统审查在所有项目上的遵守率都高得多。登记审查还表明，七个项目的报告比例高得多。多因素回归分析显示，注册状态和资金支持与更好的报告质量相关。
尽管前瞻性注册与系统评价中更高的报告质量相关，预期注册的数量仍然很低。因此,应鼓励作者进行前瞻性注册，同行审稿人,和期刊编辑，以及机构，提高系统评价在循证外科实践中的价值。
