A Cross-Sectional Study Appraising the Reporting Quality of Abstracts of Systematic Reviews With Meta-Analyses on Traumatic Dental Injuries Using the PRISMA for Abstract Checklist.

Abstract

Aims: To evaluate the reporting quality of abstracts of systematic reviews (SRs) with meta-analyses (MA) related to traumatic dental injuries (TDI) using the PRISMA for Abstract (PRISMA-A) 2020 checklist and to determine potential predictive factors associated with the overall reporting quality.

Methods: SRs with MA identified in PubMed, SCOPUS, and EBSCOhost databases from inception to May 2024 within the scope of TDI were included. The abstracts were evaluated for reporting quality in accordance with the 12 items of the PRISMA-A checklist. Each item was awarded a score of "1" or "0" for adequate or inadequate responses, whereas items that were partially addressed were awarded a score of "0.5". Utilizing multiple regression analysis, the association between six predictor variables (journal impact factor, publication year, number of authors, a priori protocol registration, word count of the abstract, and continent of the corresponding author) were examined in relation to the total PRISMA-A scores. The p-value was set at 5%.

Results: Abstracts from 53 SRs with MA were included. All adequately reported the "Title" and "General interpretation of the results and important implications". However, none adequately addressed the "Source of funding". A significant positive association was identified between the reporting quality of the abstract and both the year of publication (p = 0.032) and the word count of the abstracts (p = 0.002).

Conclusion: The adherence of abstracts of SRs with MA to the PRISMA-A checklist was deficient in several items. Authors should ensure their abstracts comply with the PRISMA-A checklist, as this will enhance their reporting quality and ultimately benefit patients, clinicians, and other stakeholders.