| Ref ID | 35 |
| First Author | T. Aro |
| Journal | WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2020 |
| URL | https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00345-019-02914-4.pdf |
| Keywords |
• Urology • Grey literature |
| Problem(s) |
• Lack of supplementary searches beyond databases |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | United States |
| Aim | To assess the use of clinical trial registries in urology systematic reviews from the five highest-impact general urology journals between January 1 and December 31, 2017. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Of the 92 included systematic reviews in urology only 16 (17%) systematic reviews searched any clinical trial registries: 14 (15%) ClinicalTrials.gov, 6 (6%) WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and 2 (2%) ISRCTN registry. This indicates that the majority of published systematic reviews in urology in 2017 did not routinely search clinical trial registries. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 92 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 204 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |