| Ref ID | 522 |
| First Author | J. F. W. Mendoza |
| Journal | BMJ EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE |
| Year Of Publishing | 2019 |
| URL | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31266765/ |
| Keywords |
• Surgery • Protocols • Missing data • Statistical • Expertise • Error • Low reporting quality • Searching • Risk of bias • Pre-specification |
| Problem(s) |
• Errors in study inclusion or omission of relevant studies • No registered or published protocol • Insufficient literature searches • Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria • Lack of statistical expertise in handling of quantitative data • Flawed risk of bias undertaken • Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | Brazil |
| Checklists |
• AMSTAR 2 |
| Aim | To assess the methodological quality (using AMSTAR 2) of all published systematic reviews comparing the effectiveness and safety of carotid endarterectomy versus carotid artery stenting for carotid artery stenosis, published between 2005 to 2017. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | Overall confidence in the results was graded as critically low for 94% of systematic reviews and low for 6% of systematic reviews. Inadequate methodology related to: reference to a published protocol, explanation of selection of study design, comprehensive search of the literature, methods for statistical combination of findings and consideration of the risk of bias on the results of meta-analysis. Additionally the number of included RCTs in each systematic review was inconsistent (4 to 15) and was not related to the year of publication. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 17 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 1091 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |