Skip to main content

Table 3 The comparison of each items of PRISMA adequately reported in SRs and MAs published in Chinese and English

From: Efficacy and safety of Tripterygium wilfordii polyglycosides for diabetic kidney disease: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Item

Chinese publications

English publications

P-value

#1 Title

11/13 (85%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#2 Abstract

12/13 (92%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#3 Rationale

13/13 (100%)

6/6 (100%)

NA

#4 Objectives

13/13 (100%)

6/6 (100%)

NA

#5 Protocol and registration

1/13 (8%)

1/6 (17%)

1.00

#6 Eligibility criteria

11/13 (85%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#7 Information sources

12/13 (92%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#8 Search

12/13 (92%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#9 Study selection

8/13 (62%)

6/6 (100%)

0.13

#10 Data collection process

11/13 (85%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#11 Data items

7/13 (54%)

4/6 (67%)

1.00

#12 Risk of bias in individual studies

12/13 (92%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#13 Summary measures

11/13 (85%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#14 Synthesis of results

13/13 (100%)

6/6 (100%)

NA

#15 Risk of bias across studies

10/13 (77%)

5/6 (83%)

1.00

#16 Additional analyses

8/13 (62%)

4/6 (67%)

1.00

#17 Study selection

11/13 (85%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#18 Study characteristics

11/13 (85%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#19 Risk of bias within studies

12/13 (92%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#20 Results of individual studies

11/13 (85%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#21 Synthesis of results

13/13 (100%)

6/6 (100%)

NA

#22 Risk of bias across studies

11/13 (85%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#23aAdditional analysis

6/8 (75%)

5/5 (100%)

0.49

#24 Summary of evidence

12/13 (92%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#25 Limitations

12/13 (92%)

6/6 (100%)

1.00

#26 Conclusions

8/13 (62%)

6/6 (100%)

0.13

#27 Funding

6/13 (46%)

5/6 (83%)

0.18

  1. Item 2 was assessed based on whether there was a structured abstract in the article, and the item was assessed specifically in Table 4 based on the PRISMA for abstract. aOptional item, if it was done in the study and adequately reported, the item was assessed as “adequately reported”; the percentage was calculated based on the applicable studies (e.g., the item 23 was evaluated according to item 16). Fisher’s exact test. P-values in italic typeface highlight a difference that was not statistically significantly different between the two journal types. NA not applicable