- Framework of problems / Objective
- Failure to consider equity, different socioeconomic groups or disadvantaged populations
- The prevalence of and factors associated with inclusion of non-English language studies in Campbell systematic reviews: a survey and meta-epidemiological study
| Ref ID | 702 |
| First Author | L. Neimann Rasmussen |
| Journal | SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS |
| Year Of Publishing | 2018 |
| URL | https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0786-6 |
| Keywords |
Campbell Author Equity Language Social care Policy Psychology |
| Problem(s) |
Language restriction Failure to consider equity, different socioeconomic groups or disadvantaged populations |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 123 |
| Summary of Findings | 87% of included 123 systematic reviews did not exclude non-English studies a priori and of these, only 15% included non-English language studies. One factor that significantly correlated with the number of included non-English studies across all models was the number of countries in which the members of the review team work. There was a dominance of researchers from English-speaking countries (52.9%) and review teams consisting only of team members from these countries (65.9%). The most frequently mentioned challenge to including non-English studies was a lack of resources (funding and time) followed by a lack of language resources (e.g. professional translators). |
| 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 |