| Ref ID | 103 |
| First Author | L. L. Wei |
| Journal | HEALTH & QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES |
| Year Of Publishing | 2019 |
| URL | https://hqlo.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s12955-019-1241-7.pdf |
| Keywords |
• Campbell • Reproducibility • Subgroup • Low reporting quality • Transparency • Social care |
| Problem(s) |
• Low reporting or methodological quality (OTHER GUIDANCE) • Unplanned or unjustified subgroup or sensitivity analyses • Methods not described to enable replication • Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided • Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported • Interpreted without considering certainty or overall quality of the evidence base |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | China |
| Aim | To assess the reporting quality (MOOSE) of systematic reviews of social welfare published in the Campbell collaboration online library up to 2014. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Most of the included 57 Campbell systematic reviews of social welfare did not completely report qualification (66.7%), research information (59.7%) and language (66.7%) of the literature searches. Confounding (52.6%) was inadequately reported. Discussions of the rationale behind exclusion criteria (84.2%), other reasons for the results (96.49%), sensitivity analyses (96.5%) and funding (96.5%) were also found to require further improvement. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 57 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 57 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |