A meta-review demonstrates improved reporting quality of qualitative reviews following the publication of COREQ- and ENTREQ-checklists, regardless of modest uptake

摘要

Reviews of qualitative studies allow for deeper understanding of concepts and findings beyond the single qualitative studies. Concerns on study reporting quality led to the publication of the COREQ-guidelines for qualitative studies?in 2007, followed by the ENTREQ-guidelines for qualitative reviews in 2012. The aim of this meta-review is to: 1) investigate the uptake of the COREQ- and ENTREQ- checklists in qualitative reviews; and 2) compare the?quality of reporting of the primary qualitative studies included?within these reviews prior- and post COREQ-publication. Reviews were searched on 02-Sept-2020 and categorized as?(1) COREQ- or (2)?ENTREQ-using, (3)?using both, or (4)?non-COREQ/ENTREQ. Proportions of usage were calculated over time. COREQ-scores of the primary studies included in these reviews were compared prior- and post COREQ-publication using T-test with Bonferroni correction. 1.695 qualitative reviews were included (222 COREQ, 369 ENTREQ, 62 both COREQ/ENTREQ and 1.042 non-COREQ/ENTREQ), spanning 12?years (2007–2019) demonstrating an exponential publication rate. The uptake of the ENTREQ in reviews is higher than the COREQ (respectively 28% and 17%), and increases over time. COREQ-scores could be extracted from 139 reviews (including?2.775 appraisals). Reporting quality improved following the COREQ-publication with 13 of the 32 signalling questions showing improvement; the average?total score increased from 15.15 to 17.74 (p-value ?0.001). The number of qualitative reviews increased exponentially, but the uptake of the COREQ and ENTREQ was modest overall. Primary qualitative studies show a positive trend in reporting quality, which may have been facilitated by the publication of the COREQ.