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) • Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews
• Failure to consider equity, different socioeconomic groups or disadvantaged populations
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country Iran
Checklists • PROGRESS
Aim To evaluate equity considerations in Cochrane reviews and the included primary studies on the prevention and management of urolithiasis.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
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.
Number of systematic reviews included 12
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 12
Treatment impacted No
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description