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	• Neurology • Cognition • Disclosure • Low methodological quality • Low reporting quality • Protocols
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?	N/A
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?	Yes