How are systematic reviews of prevalence conducted? A methodological study

Ref ID	430
First Author	C. Borges Migliavaca
Journal	BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Year Of Publishing	2020
URL	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7184711/pdf/12874_2020_Article_975.pdf
Keywords	• General medical • Disclosure • Low reporting quality • Protocols • Risk of bias
Problem(s)	• Search strategy not provided • No quality assessment undertaken or reported • Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported • No registered or published protocol
Number of systematic reviews included	235
Summary of Findings	77% of included reviews did not report a published or registered review protocol. 24% did not report whether there was an external funding source for the review. 20% of reviews did not perform quality assessment of included studies. 68% of review presented the full search strategy for at least one database;
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