Meta-analyses and forest plots presented without considering risk of bias / quality

This problem is addressed in PRISMA 2009, PRISMA 2020, AMSTAR 1, AMSTAR 2, ROBIS and MECIR. Quality appraisal and risk of bias assessments from individual trials should be incorporated into meta-analyses in systematic reviews.

Articles that support this problem:

Systematic reviews of surgical procedures in children: quantity, coverage and quality

2013 : Journal of paediatrics and child health

Incorporation of assessments of risk of bias of primary studies in systematic reviews of randomised trials: a cross-sectional study

2013 : Bmj open

Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews of Non-Randomized Studies of Adverse Cardiovascular Effects of Thiazolidinediones and Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors: Application of a New Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool

2016 : Plos medicine

How do systematic reviews of acupuncture for pain relief incorporate risk of bias assessments into the synthesis? A methodological study

2016 : Acupuncture in medicine

Overall bias methods and their use in sensitivity analysis of Cochrane reviews were not consistent

2019 : Journal of clinical epidemiology

An analysis of systematic reviews indicated low incorpororation of results from clinical trial quality assessment

2005 : Journal of clinical epidemiology

How do systematic reviews incorporate risk of bias assessments into the synthesis of evidence? A methodological study

2015 : J epidemiol community health

Forest plots in reports of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study reviewing current practice

2010 : International journal of epidemiology

Overinterpretation of research findings: evidence of “spin” in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies

2017 : Clinical chemistry

Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis on Asthma Treatments. A Cross-Sectional Study

2020 : Annals of the american thoracic society

Lessons learnt on transparency, scientific process and publication ethics. The short story of a long journey to get into the public domain unpublished data, methodological flaws and bias of the Cochrane HPV vaccines review

2019 : Bmj evidence-based medicine

Low Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews Published in the Urological Literature (2016-2018)

2020 : Urology

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

Prevalence and methodological quality of systematic reviews in Korean medical journals

2023 : Epidemiology and health

Chinese patent medicine Kanglaite injection for non-small-cell lung cancer: An overview of systematic reviews

2023 : Journal of ethnopharmacology

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

Characteristics and methodological standards across systematic reviews with Meta-analysis of efficacy and/or effectiveness of influenza vaccines: an overview of reviews

2022 : Infectious diseases

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

2023 : Jac-antimicrobial resistance

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

2022 : International journal of general medicine