Evaluating the quality of conduct of systematic reviews on the application of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for aphasia rehabilitation post-stroke

Ref ID 322
First Author A. M. Georgiou
Journal APHASIOLOGY
Year Of Publishing 2020
URL https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02687038.2019.1632786?needAccess=true
Keywords Protocols
Disclosure
Cognition
Neurology
Low reporting quality
Low methodological quality
Problem(s) Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing
Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported
No registered or published protocol
Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria
Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
Individual study characteristics not reported sufficiently
Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed
Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
Number of systematic reviews included 4
Summary of Findings The overall confidence ratings of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for recovery of language in stroke patients with aphasia based on weaknesses in critical domains identified by the AMSTAR 2 was low for one systematic review and critically low for the remaining three.
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