Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review

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 high‐impact 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