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	• General medical • Abstract / summary • Cochrane • 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?	N/A
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?	No