- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Errors in effect estimate calculations or data synthesis
- Reliability of the Evidence Addressing Treatment of Corneal Diseases: A Summary of Systematic Reviews
Ref ID | 100 |
First Author | I. J. Saldanha |
Journal | JAMA OPHTHALMOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2019 |
URL | https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaophthalmology/articlepdf/2732698/jamaophthalmology_saldanha_2019_oi_190021.pdf |
Keywords |
Cochrane Error Risk of bias Ophthalmology Searching |
Problem(s) |
Insufficient literature searches Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias Errors in effect estimate calculations or data synthesis |
Number of systematic reviews included | 98 |
Summary of Findings | Thirty-three of the included 98 systematic reviews (34%) were classified as unreliable. The most frequent reasons for unreliability were that the systematic review did not conduct a comprehensive literature search for studies (22 of 33 [67%]), did not assess risk of bias of the individual included studies (13 of 33 [39%]), and did not use appropriate methods for quantitative syntheses (meta-analysis) (12 of 17 systematic reviews that conducted a quantitative synthesis [71%]). |
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Not Applicable |
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |