Apparent adherence to guidelines, or attachment of guideline checklists, may not necessarily represent good practice in systematic reviews.
Articles that support this problem:
A descriptive analysis of child-relevant systematic reviews in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
2010 : Bmc pediatrics
Can Cochrane Reviews in controversial areas be biased? A sensitivity analysis based on the protocol of a Systematic Cochrane Review on low-level laser therapy in osteoarthritis
2005 : Photomedicine and laser therapy
Trust, but verify. The errors and misinterpretations in the Cochrane analysis by O. J. Storebo and colleagues on the efficacy and safety of methylphenidate for the treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD
2016 : Zeitschrift fur kinder-und jugendpsychiatrie und psychotherapie
Divine intervention? A Cochrane review on intercessory prayer gone beyond science and reason
2009 : Journal of negative results in biomedicine
A Cochrane review on brain [18F]FDG PET in dementia: limitations and future perspectives
2015 : European journal of nuclear medicine & molecular imaging
Validity of a Cochrane Systematic Review and meta-analysis for determining the safety of vitamin E
2017 : Bmc complementary & alternative medicine
A case study of a retracted systematic review on interactive health communication applications: impact on media, scientists, and patients
2005 : Journal of medical internet research
Some problems with Cochrane reviews of diet and chronic disease
2005 : European journal of clinical nutrition
Cochrane systematic reviews for the mental health field: is the gold standard tarnished?
2013 : Psychiatric services
Analysis of the reporting of search strategies in Cochrane systematic reviews
2009 : Journal of the medical library association: jmla
High quality of evidence is uncommon in Cochrane systematic reviews in Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Emergency Medicine
2017 : European journal of anaesthesiology
High prevalence but low impact of data extraction and reporting errors were found in Cochrane systematic reviews
2005 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions for risk factors correlate weakly with global risk factor burden: a cross-sectional study
2018 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Intervention quality is not routinely assessed in Cochrane systematic reviews of radiation therapy interventions
2017 : Journal of medical imaging & radiation oncology
Cochrane plain language summaries are highly heterogeneous with low adherence to the standards
2016 : Bmc medical research methodology
Dealing with substantial heterogeneity in Cochrane reviews. Cross-sectional study
2011 : Bmc medical research methodology
Quality of Cochrane reviews: assessment of sample from 1998
2001 : Bmj
What should the Cochrane Collaboration do about research that is, or might be, fraudulent?
2013 : Cochrane database of systematic reviews
Scope for improvement in the quality of reporting of systematic reviews. From the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group
2006 : The journal of rheumatology
Assessing imprecision in Cochrane systematic reviews: a comparison of GRADE and Trial Sequential Analysis
2018 : Systematic reviews
Cochrane systematic reviews of Chinese herbal medicines: an overview
2011 : Plos one
Empty reviews: a description and consideration of Cochrane systematic reviews with no included studies
2012 : Plos one
Mounting evidence that librarians are essential for comprehensive literature searches for meta-analyses and Cochrane reports
2004 : Journal of the medical library association
Factors predicting completion and time to publication of Cochrane reviews
2009 : Open medicine
How to decide whether a systematic review is stable and not in need of updating: Analysis of Cochrane reviews.
2020 : Research synthesis methods
Availability of large-scale evidence on specific harms from systematic reviews of randomized trials
2004 : The american journal of medicine
Errors in the conduct of systematic reviews of pharmacological interventions for irritable bowel syndrome
2010 : American journal of gastroenterology
Poor reliability between Cochrane reviewers and blinded external reviewers when applying the Cochrane risk of bias tool in physical therapy trials
2014 : Plos one
The impact of study size on meta-analyses: examination of underpowered studies in Cochrane reviews
2013 : Plos one
Evaluation of the completeness of intervention reporting in Cochrane surgical systematic reviews using the TIDieR-SR checklist: a cross-sectional study
2020 : Bmj evidence based medicine
The sensitivity of review results to methods used to appraise and incorporate trial quality into data synthesis
2007 : Spine
Prevalence of honorary and ghost authorship in Cochrane reviews
2002 : Jama
Cochrane has not consistently followed the COPE guidelines
2020 : European journal of clinical investigation
The Cochrane HPV vaccine review was incomplete and ignored important evidence of bias
2018 : Bmj evidence-based medicine
Methodological review showed correct absolute effect size estimates for time-to-event outcomes in less than one-third of cancer-related systematic reviews
2019 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews
2010 : Bmj
Do systematic reviews still exclude studies with "no relevant outcome data"?
2017 : Bmj
Multiplicity of data in trial reports and the reliability of meta-analyses: empirical study
2011 : Bmj
Assessments of attrition bias in Cochrane systematic reviews are highly inconsistent and thus hindering trial comparability
2019 : Bmc medical research methodology
Risk of bias judgments for random sequence generation in Cochrane systematic reviews were frequently not in line with Cochrane Handbook
2019 : Bmc medical research methodology
The judgement of biases included in the category “other bias” in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: a systematic survey
2019 : Bmc medical research methodology
Risk of bias assessments for selective reporting were inadequate in the majority of Cochrane reviews
2019 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
In Cochrane reviews, risk of bias assessments for allocation concealment were frequently not in line with Cochrane's Handbook guidance
2019 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Overall bias methods and their use in sensitivity analysis of Cochrane reviews were not consistent
2019 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Risk of bias assessments for blinding of participants and personnel in Cochrane reviews were frequently inadequate
2019 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Inter-review agreement of risk-of-bias judgments varied in Cochrane reviews
2020 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
P value-driven methods were underpowered to detect publication bias: analysis of Cochrane review meta-analyses
2020 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Heterogeneity can impair the results of Cochrane meta‐analyses despite accordance with statistical guidelines
2008 : Allergy
Reporting and methodologic quality of Cochrane Neonatal review group systematic reviews
2009 : Bmc pediatrics
Assessment of the quality of reporting for treatment components in Cochrane reviews of acupuncture
2014 : Bmj open
Characteristics of stakeholder involvement in systematic and rapid reviews: a methodological review in the area of health services research
2019 : Bmj open
Publication bias in meta-analyses from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
2015 : Statistics in medicine
Risk of bias in Cochrane systematic reviews: assessments of risk related to attrition bias are highly inconsistent
2018 : Biorxiv
Cochrane vertebroplasty review misrepresented evidence for vertebroplasty with early intervention in severely affected patients
2020 : Bmj evidence-based medicine
Is quality control of Cochrane reviews in controversial areas sufficient?
2006 : Journal of alternative & complementary medicine
Inclusion of nonrandomized studies in Cochrane systematic reviews was found to be in need of improvement
2014 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Many meta-analyses of rare events in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were underpowered
2021 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Adherence to conflicts of interest policy in Cochrane reviews where authors are also editorial board members: A cross-sectional analysis
2022 : Research synthesis methods
Adequacy of risk of bias assessment in surgical vs non-surgical trials in Cochrane reviews: a methodological study
2020 : Bmc medical research methodology
The normality assumption on between-study random effects was questionable in a considerable number of Cochrane meta-analyses
2023 : Bmc medicine
Linguistic analysis of plain language summaries and corresponding scientific summaries of Cochrane systematic reviews about oncology interventions
2023 : Cancer medicine
Conclusiveness, linguistic characteristics and readability of Cochrane plain language summaries of intervention reviews: a cross-sectional study
2022 : Bmc medical research methodology
Cochrane systematic reviews on traditional Chinese medicine: What matters-the quantity or quality of evidence?
2022 : Phytomedicine
Substantial heterogeneity found in reporting mortality in Cochrane systematic reviews and Core Outcome Sets in COMET database
2022 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Most Cochrane systematic reviews and protocols did not adhere to the Cochrane's risk of bias 2.0 tool
2023 : Revista da associacao medica brasileira
Striking Errors in the Methodology, Execution, and Conclusions of the Cochrane Library Review of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Low Back Pain by Traeger et al
2023 : Pain medicine
Authorship diversity in Gastroenterology-related Cochrane systematic reviews: Inequities in global representation
2022 : Frontiers in medicine
Assessment of health equity consideration in Cochrane systematic reviews and primary studies on urolithiasis
2023 : Health science reports
Lack of sex-related analysis and reporting in Cochrane Reviews: a cross-sectional study
2022 : Systematic reviews
The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview
2020 : Bmc complementary medicine and therapies