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
Number of systematic reviews included	49
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
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