| Ref ID | 573 |
| First Author | J. P. Peters |
| Journal | PLOS ONE |
| Year Of Publishing | 2015 |
| URL | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26317406/ |
| Keywords |
• Cochrane • Abstract / summary • Otolaryngology • Low reporting quality • Searching • Risk of bias |
| Problem(s) |
• Low reporting (PRISMA) quality • Insufficient literature searches • Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias • Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review • Errors in systematic review abstracts or plain language summaries |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | The Netherlands |
| Checklists |
• PRISMA 2009 • PRISMA-A |
| Aim | To assess the reporting quality of otorhinolaryngologic Cochrane reviews and systematic and meta-analyses published in ENTR journals (and their abstracts) using PRISMA and PRISMA for Abstracts |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | From 80 included systematic reviews, Cochrane reviews performed very well on PRISMA reporting whereas non-Cochrane reviews performed poorly on several items. The most inadequate criteria were: protocol registration, risk of bias/ quality assessment, declaration of financial support. Cochrane reviews however, performed worse on PRISMA for abstracts than non-Cochrane reviews. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 80 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 127 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |