- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Poor consideration of publication bias
- 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 • General medical • Publication bias • 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? | N/A |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | Yes |