- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Incorrect interpretation or statistical inference error from meta-analysis
- Quality and clarity in systematic review abstracts: an empirical study
| Ref ID | 624 |
| First Author | A. Y. Tsou |
| Journal | RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS |
| Year Of Publishing | 2016 |
| URL | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1002/jrsm.1221?download=true |
| Keywords |
Abstract / summary Spin Inference General medical |
| Problem(s) |
Errors in systematic review abstracts or plain language summaries Incorrect interpretation or statistical inference error from meta-analysis Spin or subjective interpretation of findings |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 200 |
| Summary of Findings | From 200 included abstracts, an average reported 60% of PRISMA-A checklist items (mean 8.9 ± 1.7, range 4 to 12). Only 49% described effects in terms meaningful to patients and clinicians (e.g., absolute measures), and only 43% mentioned strengths/limitations of the evidence base. For “negative” outcomes, the authors identified problematic simple restatements (20%), vague “no evidence of effect” wording (9%), and wishful wording statements (8%) which frame non-significant results to reflect the authors’ bias regarding an expected direction. |
| 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 |