Methodological quality of systematic reviews and clinical trials on women's health published in a Brazilian evidence-based health journal

Ref ID 171
First Author C. R. Macedo
Journal CLINICS
Year Of Publishing 2013
URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3634971/pdf/cln-68-04-563.pdf
Keywords Error
Publication bias
Risk of bias
Gynaecology
Reproductive health
Low reporting quality
Single reviewer
Problem(s) Poor consideration of publication bias
No quality assessment undertaken or reported
Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
Errors in effect estimate calculations or data synthesis
Single reviewer / lack of double checking
Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
Number of systematic reviews included 5
Summary of Findings None of the five included reviews considered or mentioned the quality of included trials at formulating their conclusions nor did they assess publication bias. Only two systematic reviews (40%) provided a list of included/excluded studies and clearly stated that duplicate study selection and data extraction had been performed. Only two systematic reviews (40%) assessed the quality of included trials. Finally, only two systematic reviews (40%) used an appropriate method to combine studies.
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? No