Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported

This problem is addressed in PRISMA 2009, PRISMA 2020, AMSTAR 1, AMSTAR 2 and MECIR. Systematic review authors should state the source of funding for the reviews and whether this is through a particular grant, institutional employment or a commercial sponsor. Reporting that the review was not supported by any funding or sponsor does not necessarily indicate that a systematic review is free from bias. Non-financial conflicts or researcher allegiances can mean that authors have a motive for publishing a systematic review which has no direct funding.

Articles that support this problem:

Quality of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of surgical randomized clinical trials

2020 : Bjs open

The quality of systematic reviews in hand surgery: An analysis using AMSTAR

2014 : Plastic and reconstructive surgery

Overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews on exercise therapy for chronic low back pain: a cross-sectional analysis using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool

2020 : Brazilian journal of physical therapy

Methodological quality of systematic reviews published in the urological literature from 1998 to 2012

2015 : The journal of urology

Variable methodological quality and use found in systematic reviews referenced in STEMI clinical practice guidelines

2017 : The american journal of emergency medicine

Evaluation of methodology and quality characteristics of systematic reviews in orthodontics

2011 : Orthodontics & craniofacial research

Evaluating the quality of conduct of systematic reviews on the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for aphasia rehabilitation post-stroke

2020 : Aphasiology

The effectiveness of mandibular advancement devices in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea in adults: a methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews

2020 : European journal of orthodontics

Poor reporting of search strategy and conflict of interest in over 250 narrative and systematic reviews of two biologic agents in arthritis: a systematic review

2009 : Journal of clinical epidemiology

The methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the effectiveness of non-pharmacological cancer pain management

2015 : Pain management nursing

Non-communicable diseases research output in the Eastern Mediterranean region: an overview of systematic reviews

2020 : Bmc medical research methodology

Reporting of conflicts of interest from drug trials in Cochrane reviews: cross sectional study

2012 : Bmj

Methodological quality of meta-analyses on treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a cross-sectional study using the AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) tool

2015 : Npj primary care respiratory medicine

Epidemiology, quality, and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of nursing interventions published in Chinese journals

2015 : Nursing outlook

Methodological and reporting quality evaluation of systematic reviews on acupuncture in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome: A systematic review

2018 : Complementary therapies in clinical practice

Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in assisted reproductive technologies

2012 : Human reproduction

Quality Assessment of Systematic Review of the Bariatric Surgery for Diabetes Mellitus

2019 : Journal of diabetes research

Assessment of the quality of systematic reviews on COVIDÔÇÉ19: A comparative study of previous coronavirus outbreaks

2020 : Journal of medical virology

Epidemiology, quality and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of traditional Chinese medicine interventions published in Chinese journals

2011 : Plos one

An evaluation of epidemiological and reporting characteristics of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) systematic reviews (SRs)

2013 : Plos one

Not all systematic reviews are created equal

2018 : Canadian journal of occupational therapy

Systematic review adherence to methodological or reporting quality

2017 : Systematic reviews

How are systematic reviews of prevalence conducted? A methodological study

2020 : Bmc medical research methodology

The reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in vascular surgery needs improvement: a systematic review

2014 : International journal of surgery

The Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews in Japanese Physical Therapy Journals

2020 : Progress in rehabilitation medicine

Need for quality improvement in renal systematic reviews

2008 : Clinical journal of the american society of nephrology

How do authors of systematic reviews deal with research malpractice and misconduct in original studies? A cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors

2016 : Bmj open

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

2019 : Health & quality of life outcomes

Survey of the reporting characteristics of systematic reviews in rehabilitation

2013 : Physical therapy

Methodologic quality of systematic reviews published in the plastic and reconstructive surgery literature: a systematic review

2016 : Plastic and reconstructive surgery

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

Appraising the Quality of Systematic Reviews for Age-Related Macular Degeneration Interventions: A Systematic Review

2018 : Jama ophthalmology

Reporting of financial conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of drug trials published in high-impact medical journals: comparison of results from 2017 to 2018 and 2009

2020 : Systematic reviews

The quality of Cochrane systematic reviews of acupuncture: an overview

2020 : Bmc complementary medicine and therapies

Association Between Prospective Registration and Quality of Systematic Reviews in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-epidemiological Study

2021 : Frontiers in medicine

Methodological appraisal of the evidence about efficacy of metabolic surgery in adults with non-morbid obesity and hypertension: An overview of systematic reviews

2022 : International journal of surgery

Analysis of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Practice Guidelines for Head and Neck Cancer

2022 : Laryngoscope

Adherence to the PRISMA statement and its association with risk of bias in systematic reviews published in rehabilitation journals: A meta-research study

2022 : Brazilian journal of physical therapy

An overview of the characteristics and methodological standards across systematic reviews with Meta-analysis of efficacy/effectiveness of influenza antiviral drugs

2022 : Current medical research & opinion

Identification of outcomes reported for hospital antimicrobial stewardship interventions using a systematic review of reviews

2023 : Jac-antimicrobial resistance

Acupuncture and Related Therapies for Chronic Urticaria: A Critical Overview of Systematic Reviews

2022 : Evidence-based complementary & alternative medicine: ecam

A cross-sectional analysis of harms reporting in systematic reviews evaluating laminectomy

2023 : North american spine society journal

A review found heterogeneous approaches and insufficient reporting in overviews on adverse events

2022 : Journal of clinical epidemiology

An Overview of Systematic Reviews: Acupuncture in the Treatment of Essential Hypertension

2022 : International journal of general medicine

Changing patterns in reporting and sharing of review data in systematic reviews with meta-analysis of the effects of interventions: cross sectional meta-research study

2022 : Bmj