- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews
- Nature and reporting characteristics of UK health technology assessment systematic reviews
Ref ID | 423 |
First Author | C. Carroll |
Journal | BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2018 |
URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5941703/pdf/12874_2018_Article_498.pdf |
Keywords |
Cochrane Publication bias General medical Non-Cochrane reviews |
Problem(s) |
Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews Poor consideration of publication bias |
Number of systematic reviews included | 330 |
Summary of Findings | The standard of reporting is often comparable between UK Health Technology Assessment systematic reviews and Cochrane reviews, and the reporting in both is more complete than other non-Cochrane systematic reviews. However, publication bias is almost never taken into account in Health Technology Assessment systematic 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? | Yes |