| Ref ID | 32 |
| First Author | S. Khaleel |
| Journal | BJU INTERNATIONAL |
| Year Of Publishing | 2019 |
| URL | https://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/bju.14742?download=true |
| Keywords |
• Urology • Protocols • Transparency • Publication bias • Heterogeneity • Language |
| Problem(s) |
• Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed • Poor consideration of publication bias • Inadequate analysis of heterogeneity • Language restriction |
| Article Type | Editorial |
| Article Subtype | Discussion piece |
| First Author Country | United States |
| Aim | To assess the methodological intentions of urological systematic reviews registered in PROSPERO. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | From the 576 included urological systematic review protocols in PROSPERO, roughly half o (55%) considered the issue of heterogeneity. Only a quarter addressed the issue of publication bias (28.3%). The majority of registrations (94.3%) declared no conflict of interest for the systematic review authors, but none indicated the intent to collect information on conflict of interest reporting and funding sources of included studies. With regard to language restriction, one-third of protocols (33.5%) stated they would include eligible studies irrespective of language of publication, whereas a similar percentage (32.1%) specified limitation to certain languages, usually English (32.6%). |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 576 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 576 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |