Quality of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of surgical randomized clinical trials

Ref ID 62
First Author J. Yu
Journal BJS OPEN
Year Of Publishing 2020
URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7260405/pdf/BJS5-4-535.pdf
Keywords • Surgery
• Transparency
• Protocols
• Low reporting quality
• Risk of bias
• Pre-specification
Problem(s) • Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported
• Low reporting (PRISMA) quality
• Flawed risk of bias undertaken
• No registered or published protocol
• Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria
• Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country China
Checklists • PRISMA 2009
Aim To assess the reporting quality of systematic reviews of surgical randomized trials relating to surgical interventions between 2007-2017 according to PRISMA
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings A number of PRISMA reporting criteria were frequently not met. Three items reported less than 50% of the time: accessibility of a review protocol and registration information; statement of all variables where data was sought, and the description of intervention details; and description of funding source for systematic reviews.
Number of systematic reviews included 204
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 8150
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description