| Ref ID | 878 |
| First Author | G. Jones |
| Journal | EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2023 |
| URL | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00405-022-07803-y |
| Keywords |
• Surgery • Protocols • Harms • Low methodological quality • Risk of bias |
| Problem(s) |
• Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality • Selective reporting of harms / safety / adverse events / side effects • Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided • Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias • Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review • No registered or published protocol |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | United States |
| Checklists |
• AMSTAR 2 |
| Aim | To evaluate the completeness of harms reporting in systematic reviews pertaining to functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). |
| Level of Investigation | Analytical |
| Summary of Findings | From 55 included systematic reviews of functional endoscopic sinus surgery indexed across MEDLINE (PubMed and Ovid), EMBASE, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on May 15th, 2022. Of the included systematic reviews, 19 (19/55, 34.5%) did not report harms and 39 (39/55, 70.9%) reported half of the harms items or fewer. The study found that 23 (23/55, 41.8%) of Systematic Reviews demonstrated a method of harms data collection, 26 (26/55, 47.3%) had patients available for harms analysis in their results, and 25 (25/55, 45.5%) had a balanced discussion of harms and benefits of the surgery. Over half of the Systematic Reviews were appraised as “critically low” quality using AMSTAR-2. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 55 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 354 |