Universität zu Köln

Pieper, Dawid ORCID: 0000-0002-0715-5182, Hellbrecht, Irma, Zhao, Linlu, Baur, Clemens, Pick, Georgia, Schneider, Sarah, Harder, Thomas, Young, Kelsey, Tricco, Andrea C., Westhaver, Ella and Tunis, Matthew (2022). Impact of industry sponsorship on the quality of systematic reviews of vaccines: a cross-sectional analysis of studies published from 2016 to 2019. Syst. Rev., 11 (1). LONDON: BMC. ISSN 2046-4053

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Background: Systematic reviews (SRs) provide the highest level of evidence and inform evidence-based decision making in health care. Earlier studies found association with industry to be negatively associated with methodological quality of SRs. However, this has not been investigated in SRs on vaccines. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search using MEDLINE and EMBASE in March 2020. The results were restricted to those published between 2016 and 2019 with no language restrictions. Study characteristics were extracted by one person and checked by an experienced reviewer. The methodological quality of the SRs was assessed with the AMSTAR 2 tool by multiple reviewers after a calibration exercise was performed. A summary score for each SR was calculated. The Mann-Whitney U test and Fisher's exact test were performed to compare both groups. Results: Out of 185 SRs that met all inclusion criteria, 27 SRs were industry funded. Those were matched with 30 non-industry funded SRs resulting in a total sample size of 57. The mean AMSTAR 2 summary score across all SRs was 0.49. Overall, the median AMSTAR 2 summary score was higher for the non-industry funded SRs than for the industry-funded SRs (0.62 vs. 0.36; p < .00001). Lower ratings for industry funded SRs were consistent across all but one AMSTAR 2 item, though significantly lower only for three specific items. Conclusion: The methodological quality of SRs in vaccination is comparable to SRs in other fields, while it is still suboptimal. We are not able to provide a satisfactory explanation why industry funded SRs had a lower methodological quality than non-industry funded SRs over recent years. Industry funding is an important indicator of methodological quality for vaccine SRs and should be carefully considered when appraising SR quality.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID ORCID Put Code Pieper, Dawid UNSPECIFIED orcid.org/0000-0002-0715-5182 UNSPECIFIED Hellbrecht, Irma UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Zhao, Linlu UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Baur, Clemens UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Pick, Georgia UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Schneider, Sarah UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Harder, Thomas UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Young, Kelsey UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Tricco, Andrea C. UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Westhaver, Ella UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Tunis, Matthew UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED
URN:	urn:nbn:de:hbz:38-687125
DOI:	10.1186/s13643-022-02051-x
Journal or Publication Title:	Syst. Rev.
Volume:	11
Number:	1
Date:	2022
Publisher:	BMC
Place of Publication:	LONDON
ISSN:	2046-4053
Language:	English
Faculty:	Unspecified
Divisions:	Unspecified
Subjects:	no entry
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Keywords Language HEPATITIS-B-VACCINE; METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY; INFLUENZA VACCINATION; METAANALYSES; EFFICACY; SAFETY; IMMUNOGENICITY; ADULTS; RISK; BIAS Multiple languages Medicine, General & Internal Multiple languages
URI:	http://kups.ub.uni-koeln.de/id/eprint/68712