| Ref ID | 270 |
| First Author | F. Aghajafari |
| Journal | BJPSYCH OPEN |
| Year Of Publishing | 2018 |
| URL | https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/B30CA6924AECC363B37F4FDCBBCB44DF/S2056472418000327a.pdf/div-class-title-quality-assessment-of-systematic-reviews-of-vitamin-d-cognition-and-dementia-div.pdf |
| Keywords |
• Vitamins and supplements • Risk of bias • Publication bias • Cognition |
| Problem(s) |
• Poor consideration of publication bias • No quality assessment undertaken or reported • Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed • Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | Canada |
| Checklists |
• PRISMA 2009 • AMSTAR 1 |
| Aim | To assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews of vitamin D supplementation for cognition and dementia, for reviews published up to June 2017. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Of the 11 included systematic reviews, seven were assessed as having moderate methodological quality and four had high methodological quality. The key characteristics that distinguished studies with high AMSTAR scores included assessment of quality of the studies and assessment of publication bias. With one exception, all included studies declared conflicts of interest for the review but not for the included studies. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 11 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 196 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |