Literature search in systematic reviews: How much is good enough?

Ref ID	1039
First Author	M.J. Mathew
Journal	CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GLOBAL HEALTH
Year Of Publishing	2024
URL	https://www-sciencedirect-com.sheffield.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S2213398423002725
Keywords	Paediatrics General medical Searching
Problem(s)	Errors in study inclusion or omission of relevant studies Insufficient literature searches Grey literature excluded
Number of systematic reviews included	2
Summary of Findings	The two reviews included 16 and 11 studies. Among these, only 4 studies were included in both reviews, suggesting that both reviews missed multiple eligible studies. Both reviews only searched 2 databases and neither reported grey literature searching. One review retrieved 11,695 citations and included 7 studies, the other 1,058 citations and included 12 studies. An assessment using AMSTAR 2 showed that neither of the reviews explained their selection of the study designs for inclusion, used a comprehensive literature search strategy, or provided a satisfactory explanation for any heterogeneity observed in the results.
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?