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
Allegiance
Disclosure
General medical
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? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes