Evidence Mapping Based on Systematic Reviews of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Neuropathic Pain

Ref ID	882
First Author	C. Li
Journal	NEURAL PLASTICITY
Year Of Publishing	2023
URL	https://www.hindawi.com/journals/np/2023/2680620/
Keywords	• Pain • Disclosure • Mental health • Low reporting quality • Publication bias • Transparency • Protocols • Low methodological quality • Risk of bias
Problem(s)	• Poor consideration of publication bias • Undocumented or unjustified deviations to the review protocol • Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided • Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed • Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review • No registered or published protocol • Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality • Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria
Number of systematic reviews included	34
Summary of Findings	From 34 included systematic reviews of cognitive behavioural therapy for neuropathic pain indexed across PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO up to Feb 15 2022. 24 of 38 reviews (70.5%) were rated “critically low” methodological quality (AMSTAR 2). The main reasons for downgrading the systematic reviews were as follows: there was no protocol reported before the review or no explanation for differences from protocol; there was no list of excluded studies and reasons for exclusion; there was no explanation for the study design included in the systematic reviews; there was no report of funding sources for studies included in the systematic reviews; the risk bias of the included studies was not considered when interpreting or discussing the study results; the publication bias was not adequately investigated when quantitative synthesis was made.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results?	N/A
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?	Yes