Overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews on exercise therapy for chronic low back pain: a cross-sectional analysis using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool

Ref ID	275
First Author	M. O. Almeida
Journal	BRAZILIAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL THERAPY
Year Of Publishing	2020
URL	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7082685/pdf/main.pdf
Keywords	Protocols Publication bias Risk of bias Pre-specification Disclosure Physiotherapy
Problem(s)	No registered or published protocol Poor consideration of publication bias Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review
Number of systematic reviews included	38
Summary of Findings	21% of 38 included systematic reviews had a protocol published or registered prospectively. The overall confidence in the results of 74% of included reviews was rated using AMSTAR 2 as ‘Critically low’; 16% as ‘Low’, 2% as Moderate, and 8% were rated as ‘High’. Reviews performed most poorly with respect to: explaining selection of the study designs (8%); reporting sources of funding for included studies (11%); assessing potential impact of risk of bias in individual studies on the results of the meta-analyses (13%); investigation of publication bias (21%); and establishing review methods prior to conduct of the review (21%).
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