The collaboration and reporting quality of social welfare systematic reviews in the Campbell Collaboration online library

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 Reproducibility
Campbell
Transparency
Subgroup
Social care
Low reporting quality
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
Number of systematic reviews included 57
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.
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