Interpreted without considering certainty or overall quality of the evidence base

This problem is addressed in PRISMA 2009, PRISMA 2020, AMSTAR 1, AMSTAR 2, ROBIS and MECIR. Statistical significance should be considered together with the quality of evidence and other factors such as certainty and precision. Interpreting results of studies in terms of study quality is key to remaining objective in systematic reviews.

Articles that support this problem:

Divine intervention? A Cochrane review on intercessory prayer gone beyond science and reason

2009 : Journal of negative results in biomedicine

High quality of evidence is uncommon in Cochrane systematic reviews in Anaesthesia, Critical Care and Emergency Medicine

2017 : European journal of anaesthesiology

Use of methodological tools for assessing the quality of studies in periodontology and implant dentistry: a systematic review

2014 : Journal of clinical periodontology

Clinical Vignettes Inadequate to Assess Impact of Implicit Bias: Concerning Limitations of a Systematic Review

2017 : Academic emergency medicine

Assessment of methodological quality of primary studies by systematic reviews: results of the metaquality cross sectional study

2005 : Bmj

Examining the quality of evidence to support the effectiveness of interventions: an analysis of systematic reviews

2016 : Bmj open

Assessing imprecision in Cochrane systematic reviews: a comparison of GRADE and Trial Sequential Analysis

2018 : Systematic reviews

A systematic survey showed important limitations in the methods for assessing drug safety among systematic reviews

2020 : Journal of clinical epidemiology

The collaboration and reporting quality of social welfare systematic reviews in the Campbell Collaboration online library

2019 : Health & quality of life outcomes

Quality of Cochrane reviews: Quality of Cochrane reviews is better than that of non-Cochrane reviews

2002 : Bmj: british medical journal

Systematic reviews in dentistry: Current status, epidemiological and reporting characteristics

2019 : Journal of dentistry

Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews of Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Study

2016 : Plos medicine

Methodological quality, completeness of reporting and use of systematic reviews as evidence in clinical practice guidelines for paediatric overweight and obesity

2017 : Clinical obesity

Systematic reviews on interventions for COVID-19 have rarely graded the certainty of the evidence

2021 : Sao paulo medical journal

Mind-body exercises for osteoarthritis: an overview of systematic reviews including 32 meta-analyses

2023 : Disability & rehabilitation

Caution should be exercised when assessing ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 in systematic reviews

2022 : Reviews in medical virology

Systematic Review on Electronic Health Interventions for Patients With Breast Cancer: Revisiting the Methodology

2023 : Journal of clinical oncology

Methodological quality and reporting quality of COVID-19 living systematic review: a cross-sectional study

2023 : Bmc medical research methodology