- Framework of problems /
- Undocumented or unjustified deviations to the review protocol
- Comparison of non-Cochrane systematic reviews and their published protocols: differences occurred frequently but were seldom explained
Ref ID | 342 |
First Author | N. Koensgen |
Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2019 |
URL | https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(18)30903-X/fulltext |
Keywords |
Protocols Pre-specification General medical |
Problem(s) |
Undocumented or unjustified deviations to the review protocol |
Number of systematic reviews included | 80 |
Summary of Findings | Almost all included systematic reviews (92.5%) differed from their protocols in at least one of the methods-related PRISMA-P items and their subcategories. Half the systematic reviews (48.8%) had a major difference in at least one item. On average, each systematic reviews differed from its protocol in 3.2 items PRISMA-P, of which one comprised a major difference. Only 10% of all differences were reported in the systematic review, two-thirds with an explanation (7.0% in total) |
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 |