Quality assessment of observational studies is not commonplace in systematic reviews

Ref ID 592
First Author C. Mallen
Journal JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Year Of Publishing 2006
URL https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(06)00026-6/fulltext
Keywords • Observational studies
• General medical
• Risk of bias
Problem(s) • No quality assessment undertaken or reported
• Inclusion of observational / non-randomised studies
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country United Kingdom
Aim To assess current practice in the quality assessment of original observational studies included in systematic reviews indexed in PubMed between 1999-2000 and 2003-2004
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings Six (22%) of the 1999–2000 articles described quality assessment of original studies, compared with 39 (50%) of articles published in 2003–2004. Ten different quality assessment tools were identified in the later cohort indicating a lack of consensus in appropriate critical appraisal of observational studies.
Number of systematic reviews included 32
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 32
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description