Cochrane reviews used more rigorous methods than non-Cochrane reviews: survey of systematic reviews in physiotherapy

Ref ID 616
First Author A. M. Moseley
Journal JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Year Of Publishing 2009
URL https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(08)00332-6/fulltext
Keywords Cochrane
General medical
Non-Cochrane reviews
Problem(s) Cochrane reviews more rigorous/higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews
Number of systematic reviews included 200
Summary of Findings Cochrane reviews searched more databases and were more likely to have assessed trial quality, reported dichotomous outcomes for individual trials and pooled data in a meta-analysis. Non-Cochrane reviews were more likely to conclude that there was a beneficial effect of treatment. Cochrane reviews were of higher quality than non-Cochrane reviews.
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? No