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 The short story of a long journey to get into the public domain unpublished data, methodological flaws and bias of the Cochrane HPV vaccines review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