Quality ratings of reviews in overviews: a comparison of reviews with and without dual (co-)authorship

Ref ID 705
First Author D. Pieper
Journal SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
Year Of Publishing 2018
URL https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0722-9
Keywords • Cochrane
• Author
• General medical
• Allegiance
• Disclosure
Problem(s) • Conflict of interest statement or disclosures for review authors missing
• Non-financial conflicts of interest of review authors
Number of systematic reviews included 98
Summary of Findings From the included sample of 98 systematic reviews, 51% of non-Cochrane reviews and 90% of Cochrane overviews had included at least one systematic review with dual co-authorship (reviewers who authored included studies). Higher quality scores were given to reviews in systematic overviews where dual co-authorship was present for both Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews.
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? Yes