Paper – Systematic Reviewlution

Keywords	• Diagnostic • Language • Grey literature
Problem(s)	• Grey literature excluded • Language restriction
Article Type	Empirical
Article Subtype	Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country	The Netherlands
Aim	To assess searching practices and inclusion of unpublished studies in 100 Cochrane review and 100 non-Cochrane systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy.
Level of Investigation	Descriptive
Summary of Findings	56% of non-Cochrane reviews and 6% on non-Cochrane reviews imposed language restrictions on searches.1.9% of studies included in non-Cochrane reviews were unpublished, and 2.3% of studies in Cochrane reviews.
Number of systematic reviews included	200
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed	200
Treatment impacted	No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted	Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description

Does the article have a publicly available protocol?	No
Did the review team include both methodological and clinical experts?	Not Applicable
Sampling strategy for obtaining the systematic reviews under assessment	Consecutive
Was the sample size of systematic reviews subject to any formal sample size or power calculation?	No
Were any or all of the study selection and data extraction performed in duplicate?	Yes
Were any statistical adjustments made to correct for confounding?	Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?	Yes