- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review
- Interventions for treating pain and disability in adults with complex regional pain syndrome- an overview of systematic reviews
| Ref ID | 1012 |
| First Author | M.C. Ferraro |
| Journal | COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS |
| Year Of Publishing | 2023 |
| URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10259367/ |
| Keywords |
Cochrane Pain Non-Cochrane reviews |
| Problem(s) |
No registered or published protocol Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 17 |
| Summary of Findings | AMSTAR 2 ratings for the 17 included reviews showed that four Cochrane reviews were judged as high quality. One Cochrane review was judged as low quality because it did not account for risk of bias in primary studies when interpreting the results of the review, and because of several other non‐critical weaknesses. Two non‐Cochrane reviews were judged as low quality, either because it was not stated that review methods were established prior to conducting the review or because review authors did not provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions, in addition to other non‐critical weaknesses. The remaining ten non‐Cochrane reviews were all judged as having critically low quality, due to multiple critical and non‐critical weaknesses. |
| 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? |