Quality of the Evidence Supporting the Role of Oral Nutritional Supplements in the Management of Malnutrition: An Overview of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Ref ID 268
First Author C. Baldwin
Journal ADVANCES IN NUTRITION
Year Of Publishing 2021
URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32945835
Keywords • Vitamins and supplements
• Heterogeneity
• Searching
• Risk of bias
Problem(s) • Insufficient literature searches
• Inadequate analysis of heterogeneity
• Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country United Kingdom
Checklists • AMSTAR 1
Aim To assess the methodological quality (AMSTAR) of systematic reviews of oral nutritional supplements for malnutrition published in multiple databases up to July 2019.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings From the 22 included systematic reviews, ten reviews were high quality (AMSTAR scores 8–11), 9 moderate (AMSTAR scores 3–8), and 3 poor quality (AMSTAR scores 0–3). Methodological deficiencies were limitations to searches, poor reporting of heterogeneity, and failure to incorporate quality of evidence into any recommendations.
Number of systematic reviews included 22
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 4620
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description