- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Inadequate analysis of heterogeneity
- The methodological quality of systematic reviews on the treatment of adult major depression needs improvement according to AMSTAR 2: A cross-sectional study
| Ref ID | 76 |
| First Author | K. Matthias |
| Journal | HELIYON |
| Year Of Publishing | 2020 |
| URL | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7479282/pdf/main.pdf |
| Keywords |
Mental health Publication bias Heterogeneity Risk of bias Pre-specification Low reporting quality Searching Single reviewer |
| Problem(s) |
No registered or published protocol Insufficient literature searches Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided Single reviewer / lack of double checking Individual study characteristics not reported sufficiently Inadequate analysis of heterogeneity Poor consideration of publication bias Flawed risk of bias undertaken Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 60 |
| Summary of Findings | Overall confidence in the results of the included 60 systematic reviews: four reviews were rated “high”, two were “moderate”, one was “low” and 53 were “critically low”. Limitations included: No registered or published protocol; Insufficient literature searches; Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria; Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided; Single reviewer / lack of double checking; Individual study characteristics not reported sufficiently; Inadequate analysis of heterogeneity; Poor consideration of publication bias; Flawed risk of bias undertaken. |
| 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 |