Exploring the relationship between the number of systematic reviews and quality of evidence: an orthognathic surgery-based study

Ref ID	1018
First Author	R. Grillo
Journal	ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY AND ORAL RADIOLOGY
Year Of Publishing	2024
URL	https://www-sciencedirect-com.sheffield.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S2212440323005655?via%3Dihub
Keywords	Surgery Dentistry Certainty
Problem(s)	Redundant / overlapping / duplicated review question; leads to research waste Grey literature excluded Language restriction Insufficient literature searches Poor execution of narrative synthesis
Number of systematic reviews included	171
Summary of Findings	Of the 171 SRs evaluated using PRISMA and GRADE, approximately one fifth presented evidence with a high level of certainty. Gray literature was searched in 54 SRs (46.1%) and 55% stipulated English-language studies only. The number of databases searched ranged from 1 to 7 and the number was not reported in 4 SRs. The authors found that the primary research question was not completely answered large number of SRs, due to 1) lack of well-designed and well-controlled studies 2) the publication of SRs with only moderate certainty of evidence, and 3) the lack of a universal protocol. The findings were only discussed generally, and the primary outcome was not adequately addressed in 5 SRs (2.9%). Only 45.61% of SRs reported evidence that can assist in clinical decision-making, and only 22.80% presented evidence with a high level of certainty according to the GRADE. Duplicate publications of very similar topics already covered in the literature were found in 48 SRs and fewer than 10 studies were examined in 71 SRs (41.52%).
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?