- Framework of problems /
- Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
- The Role of Complementary and Alternative Medicine on Cancer-Related Fatigue in Adults: An Overview of Systematic Reviews
| Ref ID | 1035 |
| First Author | P. Li |
| Journal | INTEGRATIVE CANCER THERAPIES |
| Year Of Publishing | 2023 |
| URL | https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/15347354231188947?rfr_dat=cr_pub++0pubmed&url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org |
| Keywords |
Complimentary & Alternative Oncology Risk of bias Low reporting quality Low methodological quality |
| Problem(s) |
Meta-analyses and forest plots presented without considering risk of bias / quality Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed Low reporting (PRISMA) quality Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 30 |
| Summary of Findings | Of the 30 included SRs 29 (96.6%) SRs were rated as “critically low” quality, and one was rated as “low” quality based on AMSTAR 2 assessments. None of the reviews provided a list of excluded studies with justifications; only 1 (3.3%) review reported report on the sources of funding for the included studies or assessed the potential impact of RoB in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis. The ROBIS evaluations showed that 11 (36.6%) SRs demonstrated a high risk of bias. According to the PRISMA checklist, no SRs reported all the items, and only 10 (33.3%) SRs sufficiently reported over 70%. Based on the GRADE system there were 51 pooled results of cancer related fatigue, of which 2 were assessed as “high” quality, 21 as “moderate” quality, 18 as “low” quality, and 10 as “very low” quality. |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | No |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? |