- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Untimely (taking too long) or resource intensive
- Systematic reviews with published protocols compared to those without: more effort, older search
| 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• Outdated searches • Untimely (taking too long) or resource intensive • No registered or published protocol |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 160 |
| 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). |
| 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 |