Table 2 Fulfilment of MAPS assessment of title and abstracta
MAPS sub-items | Pre-2011 (n = 57)b | 2011–2013 (n = 41) | 2014–2015 (n = 29) | 2016 (n = 17) | Overall (%) |
Title- used the term ‘mapping’ or synonym | 23 (40%) | 24 (59%) | 19 (66%) | 13 (76%) | 78 (54%) |
Title- indicated ‘source instrument’ | 34 (60%) | 27 (66%) | 21 (72%) | 11 (65%) | 93 (65%) |
Title- indicated ‘target instrument’ | 32 (56%) | 28 (68%) | 18 (62%) | 11 (65%) | 89 (62%) |
Abstract- Structured abstract | 51 (94%) | 39 (95%) | 29 (100%) | 15 (88%) | 134 (95%) |
Abstract- Objective of mapping stated | 41 (76%) | 33 (80%) | 26 (90%) | 14 (82%) | 114 (81%) |
Abstract- Data sources described | 29 (54%) | 21 (51%) | 19 (66%) | 14 (82%) | 83 (59%) |
Abstract- Source instrument described | 46 (85%) | 35 (85%) | 27 (93%) | 16 (94%) | 124 (88%) |
Abstract- Target instrument described | 45 (83%) | 37 (90%) | 29 (100%) | 17 (100%) | 128 (91%) |
Abstract- Models estimated described | 21 (39%) | 24 (59%) | 20 (69%) | 12 (71%) | 77 (55%) |
Abstract- Other methods described | 13 (24%) | 13 (32%) | 14 (48%) | 7 (41%) | 47 (33%) |
Abstract- Validation strategy described | 13 (24%) | 11 (27%) | 12 (41%) | 9 (53%) | 45 (32%) |
Abstract- Results appropriately reported | 39 (72%) | 28 (68%) | 17 (59%) | 11 (65%) | 95 (67%) |
Abstract- Model performance reported | 34 (63%) | 23 (56%) | 17 (59%) | 10 (59%) | 84 (60%) |
Abstract- Implications of research reported | 38 (70%) | 33 (80%) | 25 (86%) | 15 (88%) | 111 (79%) |
Mean (SD) total abstract score | 7.28 (2.93) | 7.83 (2.66) | 8.83 (1.59) | 8.82 (1.77) | 7.95 (2.56) |