- Framework of problems / Transparent
- Low reporting (PRISMA) quality
- Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literature
Ref ID | 852 |
First Author | M.C. Cavalcante |
Journal | SAO PAULO MEDICAL JOURNAL |
Year Of Publishing | 2022 |
URL | https://www.scielo.br/j/spmj/a/xT38SgKYn7SF3ZS8KWNvhmt/?lang=en |
Keywords |
Musculoskeletal Low reporting quality Low methodological quality |
Problem(s) |
Low reporting (PRISMA) quality Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality |
Number of systematic reviews included | 55 |
Summary of Findings | From 55 included systematic reviews investigating the treatment of CTS in adults indexed across MEDLINE and Cochrane Library database from January 1950 to February 2020 in Mandarin language. More than 76% of the analysed studies were “low” or “very low” methodological quality (AMSTAR). PRISMA scores were higher when meta-analysis was present (15.61 versus 10.40; P = 0.008), while AMSTAR scores were higher when studies performed meta-analysis (8.43 versus 5.59; P = 0.009) or when they included randomized controlled trials (7.95 versus 6.06; P = 0.043). |
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 |