Authors seldom report the most patient-important outcomes and absolute effect measures in systematic review abstracts

Ref ID 358
First Author A. Agarwal
Journal JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Year Of Publishing 2017
URL https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(16)30358-4/fulltext
Keywords Cochrane
Abstract / summary
General medical
Outcomes
Problem(s) Failure to define clinically meaningful outcomes
Number of systematic reviews included 190
Summary of Findings 77.5% of relative measures were reported in abstracts for outcomes of benefit, whereas only 22.5% absolute measures were reported. Similarly, for outcomes of harm, 87.2% of relative measures were provided in abstracts, compared with only 12.8% of absolute measures. 9.5% of abstracts reported both absolute and relative measures for outcomes of benefit, whereas only 1.1% of abstracts reported both measures for outcomes of harm. Results were similar between Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews.
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? No