The methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the effectiveness of non-pharmacological cancer pain management

Ref ID 626
First Author Y. Song
Journal PAIN MANAGEMENT NURSING
Year Of Publishing 2015
URL https://www.painmanagementnursing.org/article/S1524-9042(15)00083-1/fulltext
Keywords • Pain
• Low methodological quality
• Low reporting quality
• Expertise
• Statistical
• Single reviewer
• Disclosure
• Risk of bias
• Publication bias
• Grey literature
Problem(s) • Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing
• Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
• Grey literature excluded
• Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
• Single reviewer / lack of double checking
• Poor consideration of publication bias
• Lack of statistical expertise in handling of quantitative data
• No quality assessment undertaken or reported
• Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed
• Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country Korea
Checklists • AMSTAR 1
Aim to determine how the quality of methodologies in systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) impacts the effectiveness of nonpharmacological cancer pain management using AMSTAR
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings Only one article was deemed high quality; five were considered to be of low quality; zero studies stated whether they have a conflict of interest in their covered studies
Number of systematic reviews included 17
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 331
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description