Prostate Artery Embolisation: Poor Design and Reporting Impact the Value of Current Systematic Reviews

Ref ID 219
First Author T. D. Vreugdenburg
Year Of Publishing 2018
Keywords Protocols
Grey literature
Publication bias
Risk of bias
Low methodological quality
Single reviewer
Problem(s) Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing
Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed
No quality assessment undertaken or reported
Poor consideration of publication bias
No registered or published protocol
Insufficient literature searches
Grey literature excluded
Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
Single reviewer / lack of double checking
Lack of statistical expertise in handling of quantitative data
Number of systematic reviews included 9
Summary of Findings From the 9 included systematic reviews of prostate artery embolization, the median AMSTAR score was 4 out of 11 (range 0–7). None of the reviews included were prospectively registered on PROSPERO. The most common methodological concerns were related to comprehensive searches (33.3%), inclusion of grey literature (0.0%), and evaluation of publication bias (0.0%).
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