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	• Physiotherapy • Pre-specification • Risk of bias • Publication bias • Protocols • Disclosure
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?	N/A
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?	Yes