Trends in systematic reviews of kidney transplantation: A 10-year analysis of the evidence base

Ref ID 907
First Author S. Salih
Journal TRANSPLANTATION REVIEWS
Year Of Publishing 2023
URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955470X23000137?via%3Dihub
Keywords Protocols
Surgery
Transparency
Publication bias
Risk of bias
Nephrology
Non-Cochrane reviews
Low methodological quality
Problem(s) No registered or published protocol
Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality
Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided
Poor consideration of publication bias
Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias
Individual study characteristics not reported sufficiently
Number of systematic reviews included 454
Summary of Findings From 454 included systematic reviews of kidney transplantation identified from the Transplant Library from 01 January 2008 until 31 December 2018. Of the included 454 systematic reviews 70% of systematic reviews were identified as critically low methodological quality (AMSTAR 2), which increased in number over time. The systematic reviews did not score well for protocol registration (16.96%), documentation of excluded studies (24.45%) and reporting of publication bias (32.16%). Review authors did not discuss the risk of bias or carry out appropriate statistical tests to assess the risk of publication bias in 73.90% and 67.80% of systematic reviews, respectively. There was also poor reporting of the included study designs in 84.40% of systematic reviews.
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? No