| Ref ID | 1033 |
| First Author | S.R. Lewis |
| Journal | COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS |
| Year Of Publishing | 2023 |
| URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10249061/ |
| Keywords |
• Cochrane • Surgery • Non-Cochrane reviews • Low methodological quality • Musculoskeletal • Haematology |
| Problem(s) |
• No registered or published protocol • Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality • Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed • Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided • Meta-analyses and forest plots presented without considering risk of bias / quality |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | United Kingdom |
| Checklists |
• AMSTAR 2 |
| Aim | To summarise the evidence from Cochrane Reviews and other systematic reviews of randomised or quasi‐randomised trials evaluating the effects of pharmacological and non‐pharmacological interventions, administered perioperatively, on reducing blood loss, anaemia, and the need for ABT in adults undergoing hip fracture surgery. |
| Level of Investigation | Analytical |
| Summary of Findings | From 26 systematic reviews identified from the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, and five other databases up to January 2022. AMSTAR 2 summary for the 17 reviews evaluating tranexamic acid showed very low confidence in 10 of them (58.8%). None explained their selection of the study designs for inclusion and 13 (76.4%) did not report the availability of a protocol. Only 1 review reported on the sources of funding for the studies (5.8%) and 4 (23.5%) reviews assessed the potential impact of risk of bias in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis or other evidence synthesis. For the 9 reviews on iron, none explained their selection of the study designs for inclusion, and only one review reported the funding sources from each included study. Of the six reviews in which meta‐analysis was performed, three reviews did not report an assessment of publication bias alongside their results. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 26 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 5534 |