- Framework of problems / Transparent
- Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported
- A cross-sectional analysis of harms reporting in systematic reviews evaluating laminectomy
| Ref ID | 873 |
| First Author | H. Howard |
| Journal | NORTH AMERICAN SPINE SOCIETY JOURNAL |
| Year Of Publishing | 2023 |
| URL | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666548422001019?via%3Dihub |
| Keywords |
Harms Surgery Pre-specification Searching Low methodological quality |
| Problem(s) |
Selective reporting of harms / safety / adverse events / side effects Insufficient literature searches Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 26 |
| Summary of Findings | From 26 included systematic reviews that evaluated laminectomy for any indication indexed across MEDLINE (PubMed and Ovid), Embase, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in May 2022. The study authors found that two systematic reviews had completely omitted harms, 9 systematic reviews had between 0% and 50.0% harms item completion, and the 15 systematic reviews had > 50.01% harms item completion. The AMSTAR-2 evaluation graded 25 systematic reviews (25/26, 96.2%) as ‘critically low’ and 1 systematic review (1/26, 3.8%) as ‘low’. None of the included systematic reviews met the threshold for ‘moderate’ or ‘high’ quality designation. |
| 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 |