External Validity The Next Step for Systematic Reviews?

Ref ID 284
First Author S. A. Avellar
Year Of Publishing 2017
URL https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27580622/
Keywords External validity
General medical
Problem(s) Overly stringent inclusion criteria affecting external validity
Number of systematic reviews included 19
Summary of Findings Included reviews commonly reported on aspects of applicability and feasibility but information on generalisability such as statistical representativeness, was not reported. When factors of included studies that were likely to increase heterogeneity were discussed, information was not reported consistently. But, when reported, it was often part of an intervention’s rating of effectiveness. Most reviews (73%) did not calculate an average effect size.
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