- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Poor consideration of publication bias
- Digital Biomarker-Based Interventions: Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews
| Ref ID | 892 |
| First Author | H. Motahari-Nezhad |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH |
| Year Of Publishing | 2022 |
| URL | https://www.jmir.org/2022/12/e41042 |
| Keywords |
• Publication bias • General medical • Low reporting quality • Searching • Low methodological quality • Risk of bias • Disclosure |
| Problem(s) |
• Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality • Risk of bias not incorporated into conclusions of review • Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed • Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided • Insufficient literature searches • Poor consideration of publication bias |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 25 |
| Summary of Findings | From 25 included systematic reviews with meta-analyses of clinical outcomes (efficacy and safety endpoints) of digital biomarker–based interventions compared with alternative interventions without digital biomarkers indexed across PubMed and the Cochrane Library between 2019-2020. Most reviews (23/25, 92%) had critically low methodological quality according to the assessment using AMSTAR-2. From the 25 reviews 92% did not report a comprehensive literature search or provide a list of excluded studies or funding sources. Only 7 reviews (28%) took risk of bias into account when reporting results and 13 (52%) did not carry out an adequate investigation of publication bias. |
| 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 |