Assessment of the quality of systematic reviews on COVID‐19: A comparative study of previous coronavirus outbreaks

Ref ID 554
First Author Y. Yu
Journal JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY
Year Of Publishing 2020
URL https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32301508/
Keywords • Risk of bias
• Disclosure
• Single reviewer
• Low methodological quality
• Publication bias
• Expertise
• COVID
Problem(s) • Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
• Single reviewer / lack of double checking
• Poor consideration of publication bias
• Lack of statistical expertise in handling of quantitative data
• No quality assessment undertaken or reported
• Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Meta-epidemiological analysis
First Author Country China
Aim To assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews on COVID‐19, severe acute respiratory syndrome, and Middle East respiratory syndrome
Level of Investigation Analytical
Summary of Findings Of the included reviews, 6, 12, and 31 systematic reviews were of moderate, low, and critically low quality, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that the SR topic (P < .001), the involvement of a methodologist (P < .001), and funding support (P = .046) were significantly associated with the methodological quality of the systematic review
Number of systematic reviews included 49
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 280
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description