PD229 - PRISMA FOR ABSTRACTS ADHERENCE IN SRMAS ON NUTRITIONAL CARE OF CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS: A META-RESEARCH STUDY

PD229

PRISMA FOR ABSTRACTS ADHERENCE IN SRMAS ON NUTRITIONAL CARE OF CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS: A META-RESEARCH STUDY

L. W. D. ECHABE^1,*, K. P. Zucatti¹, A. P. Kropidlofscky¹, J. Sander², I. D. C. Eckert³, F. M. Silva¹ on behalf of NCBE - Nutrição Clinica Baseada em Evidências

¹Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre, ²Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre, ³EVIDENS - Ensino e Consultoria Científica LTDA, Porto Alegre, Brazil

Rationale: Systematic reviews with meta-analysis (SRMAs) synthesize evidence to inform clinical decision-making. As abstracts are often the primary section consulted by readers, clear and complete reporting following established guidelines is essential. We aimed to (1) assess reporting completeness (RC) in SRMA abstracts addressing nutritional care process steps (NCP), from screening through monitoring, in critically ill adults and (2) explore factors associated with adherence to the PRISMA for Abstracts guideline.

Methods: This meta-research study included SRMAs on the NCP in critically ill patients identified in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane (all searched on April 9, 2024). A protocol was pre-registered (OSF: 10.17605/OSF.IO/YUZ9F). Reporting completeness was assessed using an adapted 14-item PRISMA for Abstracts checklist. Crude and weighted RC scores were calculated. Prespecified SRMA and journal characteristics were explored as factors associated with reporting completeness. Analysis was conducted in SPSS 22.0.

Results: 237 SRMAs were included. The mean crude RC score was 6.17 ± 1.74 and the weighted score 44.1 ± 12.5%. PRISMA for Abstracts adherence did not differ by journal characteristics. Higher RC scores were observed in SRMAs published after 2013 and in those with >5 authors, protocol registration, PRISMA citation and checklist attachment, and use of GRADE for certainty of evidence assessment. No association was found with publication bias assessment, intervention type, research questions, or number of studies in the meta-analyses.

Conclusion: SRMAs on the NCP in critically ill patients showed low PRISMA for Abstracts adherence. Higher adherence was associated with the number of authors and methodological aspects related to the quality of SR and its transparency and reproducibility. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Disclosure of Interest: None declared