Evaluating the quality of meta-analytical reviews using the AMSTAR-2: A systematic review of meta-analytical reviews regarding child sexual abuse interventions

Sánchez de Ribera, Olga, Trajtenberg, Nicolás ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4451-3874 and Christensen, Larissa S. 2020. Evaluating the quality of meta-analytical reviews using the AMSTAR-2: A systematic review of meta-analytical reviews regarding child sexual abuse interventions. Child Abuse and Neglect 104 , 104463. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104463

Preview

PDF - Accepted Post-Print Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (588kB) | Preview

Abstract

Background Effects of treatment for child sexual abuse (CSA) victims have important implications. Assessing Risk of Bias (RoB) is a vital step to inform interpretations of treatment effects for these victims. The AMSTAR-2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) offers a comprehensive critical appraisal, allowing users to distinguish high quality reviews. Objective The aim of this article is two-fold: 1) to provide an up-to-date systematic review of treatment program meta-analytical reviews on interventions for CSA victims; and 2) to evaluate the quality of meta-analytical reviews using the AMSTAR-2. This is the first systematic review to examine the quality of meta-analyses on the effectiveness of CSA interventions using the AMSTAR-2. Method Eight electronic databases were searched for articles published up to April 2019. Meta-analytical reviews that assessed the effectiveness of any treatment modality for sexually abused children and adolescents up to 18 years old were considered. Outcome measures included physical and mental symptoms, and disorders, measured through validated instruments. Of 2794 articles, nine meta-analyses met the eligibility criteria. There was a variety of interventions, including: trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy CBT, psychodrama, play therapy, and eclectic interventions. The most common outcomes measured were post-traumatic stress disorder/trauma, externalizing, internalizing, and sexualized behaviors. Results Although effect sizes were moderately significant, with treatment having a positive effect, all meta-analyses showed a high RoB. Conclusions To use the best available evidence in clinical decision-making for CSA victims, reviewers should conduct meta-analyses that employ RoB tools.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Social Sciences (Includes Criminology and Education)
Publisher:	Elsevier
ISSN:	0145-2134
Date of First Compliant Deposit:	15 April 2020
Date of Acceptance:	16 March 2020
Last Modified:	06 Nov 2023 21:37
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/131016

Citation Data

Cited 3 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item