- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review
- Quality assessment of the methods used in published opioid conversion reviews
| Ref ID | 244 |
| First Author | S. Saokaew |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF PAIN & PALLIATIVE CARE PHARMACOTHERAPY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2012 |
| URL | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23216173/ |
| Keywords |
Transparency Pharmacological Pain Risk of bias Low reporting quality Single reviewer |
| Problem(s) |
Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided Single reviewer / lack of double checking Individual study characteristics not reported sufficiently No quality assessment undertaken or reported Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 5 |
| Summary of Findings | Of the five included opioid conversion systematic reviews published across several databases up to April 2012, no review mentioned about the duplicate study selection and data extraction. Two reviews included a list of studies that were excluded studies. One study did not provide information on the characteristics of primary studies that were included. Of the three reviews that evaluated the quality of primary studies, two used the quality of included studies in formulating conclusions. Only two reviews provided information about conflicts of interest. Of the five included systematic reviews, three reached a moderate score; two had poor AMSTAR quality. |
| 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 |