The quality of systematic reviews addressing peripheral nerve repair and reconstruction

Ref ID 210
First Author B. J. Sun
Journal JOURNAL OF PLASTIC, RECONSTRUCTIVE & AESTHETIC SURGERY: JPRAS
Year Of Publishing 2019
URL https://www.jprasurg.com/article/S1748-6815(18)30423-6/fulltext
Keywords Surgery
Grey literature
Publication bias
Problem(s) Grey literature excluded
Poor consideration of publication bias
Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
Number of systematic reviews included 26
Summary of Findings The overall median AMSTAR score for the 26 included systematic reviews addressing peripheral nerve repair was 5, reflecting a “fair” quality. There was no evidence of AMSTAR score improvement over time. The largest areas of deficiency included using publication status (e.g. grey literature) as inclusion criteria ( n = 7), and assessing for publication bias ( n = 8).
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