To assess the reporting quality (PRISMA-A) of systematic review abstracts published in neurosurgical journals between 2007 and 2017.
Level of Investigation
Descriptive
Summary of Findings
The overall quality of reporting in included abstracts was suboptimal, with a mean score of 53.05% (±11.18). Reporting scores were higher among abstracts published after the release of the PRISMA-A guidelines than those published beforehand (p<.001).
Number of systematic reviews included
257
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed
627
Treatment impacted
No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted
Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description
Does the article have a publicly available protocol?
Yes
Did the review team include both methodological and clinical experts?
Not Applicable
Sampling strategy for obtaining the systematic reviews under assessment
Comprehensive searches on a particular topic (clinical or methodological)
Was the sample size of systematic reviews subject to any formal sample size or power calculation?
No
Were any or all of the study selection and data extraction performed in duplicate?
Yes
Were any statistical adjustments made to correct for confounding?
Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?
