Articles that support this problem:
Multiple overlapping systematic reviews facilitate the origin of disputes: the case of thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism
2018 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Strong heterogeneity of outcome reporting in systematic reviews
2016 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Bias due to changes in specified outcomes during the systematic review process
2010 : Plos one
Survey of new 2007 and 2011 Cochrane reviews found 37% of prespecified outcomes not reported
2015 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Potential impact of missing outcome data on treatment effects in systematic reviews: imputation study
2020 : Bmj
Authors seldom report the most patient-important outcomes and absolute effect measures in systematic review abstracts
2017 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
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
Some problems with Cochrane reviews of diet and chronic disease
2005 : European journal of clinical nutrition
Systematic review of spinal manipulation: A biased report
2006 : Journal of the royal society of medicine
Systematic reviews of surgical procedures in children: quantity, coverage and quality
2013 : Journal of paediatrics and child health
Can a core outcome set improve the quality of systematic reviews?–a survey of the Co-ordinating Editors of Cochrane Review Groups
2013 : Trials
Characteristics and quality of systematic reviews of acupuncture, herbal medicines, and homeopathy
2003 : Complementary medicine research
Alcohol, cardiovascular disease and industry funding: A co-authorship network analysis of systematic reviews
2021 : Social science & medicine
Methodological issues in meta-analyses of observational studies: the need for attention to the details
2022 : British journal of anaesthesia