Methodologic Assessment of the Systematic Reviews of Ophthalmic Adverse Drug Reactions Published in Ophthalmology Journals: A Systematic Review

Ref ID 236
First Author A. Penedones
Journal OPHTHALMIC RESEARCH
Year Of Publishing 2018
URL https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/489932
Keywords Harms
Protocols
Pharmacological
Risk of bias
Pre-specification
Ophthalmology
Low reporting quality
Problem(s) No quality assessment undertaken or reported
Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria
Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
No registered or published protocol
Number of systematic reviews included 21
Summary of Findings Of the 21 systematic reviews reporting ophthalmic adverse drug reactions, there were weak areas of AMSTAR 2 quality. Only 14% reported an a priori protocol; the methodological quality was assessed in 57% systematic reviews; 71% of systematic reviews did not explain their selection of the study designs for inclusion in the review. The list of excluded articles and reasons of exclusion was not described in 67% of systematic reviews.
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? Yes