- Framework of problems / Transparent
- Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported
- Association Between Prospective Registration and Quality of Systematic Reviews in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-epidemiological Study
| Ref ID | 796 |
| First Author | Q. Zheng |
| Journal | FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE |
| Year Of Publishing | 2021 |
| URL | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.639652/full |
| Keywords |
Protocols Pre-specification Endocrinology Low reporting quality Non-Cochrane reviews Low methodological quality |
| Problem(s) |
No registered or published protocol Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality Low reporting (PRISMA) quality Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported Poor consideration of publication bias Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 238 |
| Summary of Findings | From 238 included systematic reviews of type 2 diabetes mellitus indexed on PubMed between 2005 and 2018, higher scores were noted for registered reviews, relative to non-registered reviews (AMSTAR-2 mean score: 18.0 vs. 14.5, P = 0.000; PRISMA mean score: 20.4 vs. 17.6, P = 0.000). AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA scores were associated with registration status, country of the first author, and statistical results. The proportion discussing publication bias and reporting funding sources were <40% for both registered and non-registered systematic 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 |