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