| 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 |
• Risk of bias • Low reporting quality • Protocols • Surgery |
| Problem(s) |
• No registered or published protocol • Low reporting (PRISMA) quality • No quality assessment undertaken or reported • Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review • Flawed risk of bias undertaken |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | United Kingdom |
| Checklists |
• PRISMA 2009 |
| Aim | To assess the reporting quality (PRISMA) of systematic reviews of plastic surgery published in 2013 and 2014 in 5 major plastic surgery journals. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| 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%), . |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 79 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 163 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |