Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in the orthopaedic literature

Ref ID	653
First Author	J. J. Gagnier
Journal	JBJS
Year Of Publishing	2013
URL	https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23780547/
Keywords	• Orthopaedic • Grey literature • Protocols • Statistical • Expertise • Publication bias • Low reporting quality • Low methodological quality • Single reviewer • Risk of bias
Problem(s)	• No registered or published protocol • Grey literature excluded • Single reviewer / lack of double checking • Poor consideration of publication bias • Lack of statistical expertise in handling of quantitative data • Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review • Low reporting (PRISMA) quality • Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
Number of systematic reviews included	76
Summary of Findings	Both reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in the top five orthopaedic journals were poor
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results?	No
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?	Yes