- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Insufficient literature searches
- Reliability of the evidence to guide decision-making in foot ulcer prevention in diabetes: an overview of systematic reviews
Ref ID | 858 |
First Author | F. Crawford |
Journal | BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2022 |
URL | https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12874-022-01738-y |
Keywords |
Reproducibility Expertise Risk of bias Endocrinology Low reporting quality Searching Low methodological quality |
Problem(s) |
High risk of bias (ROBIS) Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria Insufficient literature searches Lack of statistical expertise in handling of quantitative data Poor execution of narrative synthesis |
Number of systematic reviews included | 30 |
Summary of Findings | From 30 included systematic reviews of foot ulcer prevention in diabetes indexed across 6 databases up to 17th May 2021. Many of the 30 included systematic reviews were poorly reported and have fundamental methodological shortcomings (assessed using ROBIS) associated with increased risk of bias. Most concerns relate to vague inclusion criteria (60%), weak search or selection strategies (70%) and quality appraisal methods (53%) and inexpert conduct and interpretation of quantitative and narrative evidence syntheses (57%). |
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 |