The need for caution in interpreting high quality systematic reviews

Ref ID 353
First Author K. Hopayian
Journal BMJ
Year Of Publishing 2001
URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1121240/pdf/681.pdf
Keywords Pain
Risk of bias
Problem(s) Perpetuates citation of poor quality primary study data
Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias
Number of systematic reviews included 2
Summary of Findings Two systematic reviews (plus one meta-analysis, excluded here) were assessed to be compromised to due to inclusion of studies with atypical populations; using checklists to score study quality; and using inadequate outcome measures.
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