- Framework of problems / Transparent
- Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
- Assessment of the methodological quality of systematic reviews published in the urological literature from 1998 to 2008
Ref ID | 28 |
First Author | S. L. MacDonald |
Journal | THE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2010 |
URL | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20639030/ |
Keywords |
Grey literature Publication bias Risk of bias Urology Low reporting quality Searching |
Problem(s) |
Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality No quality assessment undertaken or reported Insufficient literature searches Grey literature excluded Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided Poor consideration of publication bias Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review |
Number of systematic reviews included | 57 |
Summary of Findings | The mean AMSTAR score for the included 57 urologic systematic reviews was 4.8 ( standard deviation 2.0) points. Fewer than half of all systematic reviews performed a systematic literature search that included at least 2 databases (49.1%) or unpublished studies (31.6%), or provided a list of included and excluded studies (45.6%). Of the systematic reviews 63.2% assessed and documented the methodological quality of included studies. 63.2% assessed and documented the methodological quality of included studies. Only 14.0% of studies factored methodological study quality into the conclusions. The likelihood of publication bias and the risk of conflict of interest were explicitly considered by the authors of 9 (15.8%) and 3 (5.3%) of the 57 systematic reviews, respectively. Systematic reviews with The Cochrane Collaboration authorship affiliation had a higher mean AMSTAR score than those with no such reported affiliation (6.5 (SD 1.2) vs 4.4 (SD 1.9) points (p <0.001). |
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? | No |