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
Number of systematic reviews included	17
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
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results?	N/A
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?	No