| Ref ID | 1040 |
| First Author | C.L. McCorquodale |
| Journal | BMC ANESTHESIOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2023 |
| URL | https://bmcanesthesiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12871-023-02243-5 |
| Keywords |
• Pain • Pharmacological • Low methodological quality |
| Problem(s) |
• Meta-analyses and forest plots presented without considering risk of bias / quality • Lack of statistical expertise in handling of quantitative data • Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided • Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed • Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality • No registered or published protocol |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | United Kingdom |
| Checklists |
• AMSTAR 2 |
| Aim | To summarise and critically assess the quality of systematic reviews (SRs) on acute postoperative pain control indexed across PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane up to November 2022, related to 20 recommendations from two previously published consensus guideline papers. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Of the 12 included SRs on acute postoperative pain control indexed across PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane up to November 2022 seven were critically low quality (AMSTAR 2), two were low, one was high and two could not be fully appraised. Only 4 reviews (33.3%) reported a protocol, and only 2 (16.6%) provided a list of excluded studies with justifications or reported the sources of funding of included studies. Over half (7/12, 58.3%) did not use appropriate methods for statistical combination of results nor assessed the potential impact of RoB in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis. The supplementary material of 2 could not be accessed and therefore the AMSTAR 2 assessments could not be fully completed. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 12 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 787 |