- Framework of problems / Objective
- Single reviewer / lack of double checking
- Systematic reviews supporting practice guideline recommendations lack protection against bias
Ref ID | 333 |
First Author | J. P. Brito |
Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2013 |
URL | https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(13)00031-0/pdf |
Keywords |
Protocols Grey literature Endocrinology Low reporting quality Low methodological quality Single reviewer |
Problem(s) |
No registered or published protocol Grey literature excluded Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided Single reviewer / lack of double checking Poor consideration of publication bias Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality |
Number of systematic reviews included | 69 |
Summary of Findings | Included reviews had a mean AMSTAR score of 6.4 (standard deviation, 2.5) from a maximum score of 11, with scores improving over time. Systematic reviews of randomized trials had higher AMSTAR scores than those of observational studies. Low-quality systematic reviews (methodological AMSTAR score 1 or 2 of 5, n 5 24, 35%) were cited in 24 different practice recommendations and were the main evidentiary support for five recommendations, of which only one acknowledged the quality of systematic reviews |
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 |