- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Flawed risk of bias undertaken
- Compliance of systematic reviews in plastic surgery with the PRISMA statement
| Ref ID | 186 |
| First Author | S.-Y. Lee |
| Journal | JAMA FACIAL PLASTIC SURGERY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2016 |
| URL | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26719993/ |
| Keywords |
Protocols Surgery Risk of bias Low reporting quality |
| Problem(s) |
No registered or published protocol Low reporting (PRISMA) quality Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review Flawed risk of bias undertaken No quality assessment undertaken or reported |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 79 |
| Summary of Findings | The median PRISMA score was 16 (out of 27) for the 79 included systematic reviews of plastic surgery published in 2013 and 2014 in 5 major plastic surgery journals. Reporting was poorest for items related to the use of review protocol (5%), presentation of data on the risk of bias of each study (18%), presenting the results of subgroup analyses (25%), presenting risk of bias across studies (24%), . |
| 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 |