- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- No quality assessment undertaken or reported
- Quality assessment practice in systematic reviews of mediation studies: results from an overview of systematic reviews
Ref ID | 820 |
First Author | T.T. Vo |
Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2022 |
URL | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435621004169?casa_token=WQzh4b8n_L0AAAAA:ddJ8nV-nfdH6D56amzMt9YTw1DdBr_hYqZ1ZZke71DcSywq9tYYeXXuXj1siFdvyuN3wEKfoS3c#sec0002 |
Keywords |
Statistical Risk of bias General medical |
Problem(s) |
No quality assessment undertaken or reported Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias |
Number of systematic reviews included | 103 |
Summary of Findings | From 103 systematic reviews of mediation studies indexed in across four databases from 2007 to 2020, 24 (23%) reviews did not assess the risk of bias of eligible studies, and 48 (47%) assessed risk of bias using a tool that was not specifically designed to evaluate mediation analysis. |
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 |