| Ref ID | 153 |
| First Author | C. B. Terwee |
| Journal | QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH |
| Year Of Publishing | 2016 |
| URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4830864/pdf/11136_2015_Article_1122.pdf |
| Keywords |
• General medical • Risk of bias • Searching • Single reviewer |
| Problem(s) |
• Insufficient literature searches • No quality assessment undertaken or reported • Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality • Inconclusive or lack of recommendations • Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review • Single reviewer / lack of double checking |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | The Netherlands |
| Checklists |
• AMSTAR 1 |
| Aim | To assess the quality of systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments and to determine whether the quality has improved since a previous study in 2007 (Mokkink et al 2009) published in MEDLINE and EMBASE. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Despite a clear improvement in conduct, since the study by Mokkink et al in 2009, of the 102 systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments there were still deficits. The selection of abstracts and full-text articles was performed by at least two reviewers independently in 29% of the reviews. In 41 % of the reviews, the methodological quality of the included studies was assessed. Study quality was only taken in to account into the synthesis of 20% of reviews. In 49 % of the reviews clear recommendations were provided for either one or multiple outcome measurement instruments per construct that were considered the best. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 102 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 1703 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |