Assessment of methodological quality of primary studies by systematic reviews: results of the metaquality cross sectional study

Ref ID 700
First Author L.P. Moja
Journal BMJ
Year Of Publishing 2005
URL https://www.bmj.com/content/330/7499/1053
Keywords Cochrane
Risk of bias
Certainty
Problem(s) Interpreted without considering certainty or overall quality of the evidence base
No quality assessment undertaken or reported
Number of systematic reviews included 965
Summary of Findings Quality assessment was assessed in 88.5% of the reviews and was more often carried out in Cochrane reviews than in paper based reviews (93.9% v 60.3%). Only 51.4% used the quality assessment in the analysis and interpretation of the results or in their discussion, with no significant differences between Cochrane reviews and paper based reviews (52% v 49%).
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? Yes