- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review
- Blinded by PRISMA: are systematic reviewers focusing on PRISMA and ignoring other guidelines?
| Ref ID | 557 |
| First Author | P. S. Fleming |
| Journal | PLOS ONE |
| Year Of Publishing | 2014 |
| URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4006811/pdf/pone.0096407.pdf |
| Keywords |
Expertise General medical Team |
| Problem(s) |
Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review Low reporting or methodological quality (OTHER GUIDANCE) |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 701 |
| Summary of Findings | The guideline most frequently omitted within the subset of SRs citing only PRISMA was MOOSE, with 236/284 (83%) of epidemiologic reviews citing the latter guidelines, in isolation. Similarly, in SRs of diagnostic tests 23/57 (40%) cited PRISMA without referring to either QUADAS or QUADAS-2. In a multivariable analysis, medical field of publication and methodologist involvement were significant predictors of appropriate use of guidelines |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Not Applicable |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | Yes |