The search and selection for primary studies in systematic reviews published in dental journals indexed in MEDLINE was not fully reproducible

Ref ID	366
First Author	C. M. Faggion Jr
Journal	JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Year Of Publishing	2018
URL	https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29476922/
Keywords	• Reproducibility • Grey literature • Low methodological quality • Dentistry
Problem(s)	• Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided • Grey literature excluded • Methods not described to enable replication
Number of systematic reviews included	530
Summary of Findings	None of the included systematic reviews had complete reporting of the search strategies and selection process. 1.5% of systematic reviews reported the list of excluded articles (with reasons for exclusion) after title and abstract assessment. Systematic reviews with better reporting of searches and selection criteria were significantly associated with higher journal impact factor, number of citations, and inclusion of meta-analysis.
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