- Framework of problems / Objective
- Failure to consider equity, different socioeconomic groups or disadvantaged populations
- Assessment of health equity consideration in Cochrane systematic reviews and primary studies on urolithiasis
| Ref ID | 846 |
| First Author | R. Basirat |
| Journal | HEALTH SCIENCE REPORTS |
| Year Of Publishing | 2023 |
| URL | https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.sheffield.idm.oclc.org/doi/10.1002/hsr2.1133 |
| Keywords |
Cochrane Equity Urology |
| Problem(s) |
Failure to consider equity, different socioeconomic groups or disadvantaged populations Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 12 |
| Summary of Findings | From 12 Cochrane reviews on the prevention and management of urolithiasis published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews up to January 1, 2022. The authors of Cochrane systematic reviews on urolithiasis rarely considered health equity dimensions when designing and performing their studies. None of the 12 included Cochrane reviews had specifically mentioned the PROGRESS framework in the method section whereas gender distribution and place of residence were reported in two and one reviews, respectively. Neither of the included reviews had assessed the difference of the intervention effect on any of the PROGRESS items. |
| 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? | No |