This problem is not addressed in any checklist or guideline. Apparent adherence to guidelines, or attachment of guideline checklists, does not guarantee good practice in systematic reviews.
Articles that support this problem:
Longitudinal analysis of reporting and quality of systematic reviews in highâimpact surgical journals
2017 : British journal of surgery
Blinded by PRISMA: are systematic reviewers focusing on PRISMA and ignoring other guidelines?
2014 : Plos one
Journal impact factor is associated with PRISMA endorsement, but not with the methodological quality of low back pain systematic reviews: a methodological review
2020 : European spine journal
Quality of Cochrane reviews: assessment of sample from 1998
2001 : Bmj
Methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews published in the highest ranking journals in the field of pain
2017 : Anesthesia & analgesia
Increased risks for random errors are common in outcomes graded as high certainty of evidence
2019 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
The art and science of study identification: a comparative analysis of two systematic reviews
2016 : Bmc medical research methodology
The quality of systematic reviews in hand surgery: An analysis using AMSTAR
2014 : Plastic and reconstructive surgery
The methodological quality of systematic reviews of animal studies in dentistry
2012 : The veterinary journal
Systematic mixed-methods reviews are not ready to be assessed with the available tools
2011 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Contradictory Findings of Two Recent Meta-Analyses: What Are We Supposed to Believe About Anesthetic Technique in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery?
2021 : Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia
Association Between Prospective Registration and Quality of Systematic Reviews in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-epidemiological Study
2021 : Frontiers in medicine
Assessing the Reporting of Harms in Systematic Reviews Focused on the Therapeutic and Cosmetic Uses of Botulinum Toxin
2023 : Clinical drug investigation
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
Systematic review search methods evaluated using the Preferred Reporting of Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and the Risk Of Bias In Systematic reviews tool
2020 : International journal of technology assessment in health care
Quality appraisal of systematic reviews of interventions for children with cerebral palsy reveals critically low confidence
2021 : Developmental medicine & child neurology
Most systematic reviews reporting adherence to AMSTAR 2 had critically low methodological quality: a cross-sectional meta-research study
2024 : Journal of clinical epidemiology
Adherence to systematic review standards: Impact of librarian involvement in Campbell Collaboration's education reviews
2022 : The journal of academic librarianship