| 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 • Team • General medical |
| Problem(s) |
• Low reporting or methodological quality (OTHER GUIDANCE) • Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | United Kingdom |
| Aim | To assess the use of methodological guidelines in systematic reviews citing the PRISMA guidelines over a 12-month period. Factors associated with appropriate use of guidelines including review type, field of publication and involvement of a methodologist were investigated. |
| Level of Investigation | Analytical |
| 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 |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 701 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 775 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |