| Ref ID | 348 |
| First Author | K. Allers |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2018 |
| URL | https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(17)30170-1/fulltext |
| Keywords |
• Pre-specification • General medical • Currency • Searching • Protocols |
| Problem(s) |
• Outdated searches • Untimely (taking too long) or resource intensive • No registered or published protocol |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | Germany |
| Aim | To assess trends in published protocols of systematic reviews and to analyse how systematic reviews with published protocols differ from those without from 80 published systematic reviews with protocols and 80 published systematic reviews without protocols in 2012 and 2013. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Systematic reviews with protocols reported their methods more comprehensively than systematic reviews without protocols, but their median time from search to submission was longer (325 vs. 122 days; P < 0.001) meaning that the searches of systematic reviews with published protocols were about 200 days older compared with their controls. Almost two-thirds of the systematic reviews with protocols and about 10% of the controls could be found in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 160 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 1574 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |