| Ref ID | 284 |
| First Author | S. A. Avellar |
| Journal | EVALUATION REVIEW |
| Year Of Publishing | 2017 |
| URL | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27580622/ |
| Keywords |
• General medical • External validity |
| Problem(s) |
• Overly stringent inclusion criteria affecting external validity |
| Article Type | Non-systematic literature review |
| First Author Country | United States |
| Aim | To assess how systematic reviews address external validity in a sample of both federally funded and non-federally funded reviews. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| 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. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 19 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 19 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |