| Ref ID | 859 |
| First Author | M.S. Cumpston |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2023 |
| URL | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435623000148?via%3Dihub |
| Keywords |
• Non-Cochrane reviews • Pre-specification • Low reporting quality • Statistical • Reproducibility |
| Problem(s) |
• Methods not described to enable replication • Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria • Low reporting or methodological quality (OTHER GUIDANCE) |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | Australia |
| Aim | To examine the specification and use of summary and statistical synthesis methods, focusing on synthesis methods other than meta-analysis. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | From 100 randomly sampled systematic reviews of public health and health systems interventions published in 2018 from the Health Evidence and Health Systems Evidence databases. Most (78%) of the included systematic reviews specified (that is, defined or discussed in the text) meta-analysis. Other synthesis methods were rarely specified (5/100). In five systematic reviews, the authors stated that they did not intend to statistically synthesize results, and in 15 no information about synthesis methods was specified. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 100 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 166 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |