Survey of the reporting characteristics of systematic reviews in rehabilitation

Ref ID 91
First Author S. Gianola
Journal PHYSICAL THERAPY
Year Of Publishing 2013
URL https://watermark.silverchair.com/ptj1456.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAArUwggKxBgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggKiMIICngIBADCCApcGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQMM0uL4l59uQPVh7OjAgEQgIICaDMxjCTjPCNuj2TfgnBKsSazQo7oVJICi5_1U2ZLu-wVVcOaOXx9b1L30SGEfMtQVlca7v0Njsb88VbByFaHlL8sK8_nY94gel0IiYJ1U8rD40HpCyhbgNHy4_1OrC1D3RtCWfrK2lpiCOy3-Q-uuluN0NBxEyOiLW0twvnxQVpSjCKuWXOOg_-joQGadZ4znrwOZhJN-F6Y4cZeSz1lteR6lTBCsK6P7MRehPAxtVC1ZI_zJ-z6jaqT3BBGK8AbYp-3yXMWi4jcXBXvuZsWFZsD4fhnc7yFWZTDvlcB7_anzSFCwqffE_PQU8QvKs01NyWANMA2TposwkGzipzmTXOZJ4JAm4dpBAZlsYlmPLBVbCLS431JE9GO4vOwxU7c4eXcu1nluEFSHk7ZKtNVeRJnz5MNOwT3X-8GWVRnYHDXPpP1W8NbPPYvOghU8NXZ57ORtcxsmvoivasirkrzveG2NCws5SSlRvUZKRlh1sFRwym8kkIiGIIyW8rjMaQF1Ph4rWDxSU6-HetwFicZASsRT8-0oGIZrkRNsjHCkWxAoxNwPut8gsA2smJeHx2ApCBzqBYtP6ozuTzIE0Jgas-7vg-WhwYyfUXWPt_-TdBFDzivf4ONvg2_c9tXwQnxeM-soQTF9JyCZHkvxn7Hs7J5pbH4OFqgIbhXQsCX6m1ELbnfRv_MOWHgpUbo1mHZySEjdoPUCh2FWkLQjUdXTS5aQKC3GSmUXp00drwj0g0qM2hUA67-nCwWRz-m3AaYm1lwGOu9z9ztne7e-Jr7VcrCZYHWrJu84nPkNC6lyLQaJn514dAT7rk
Keywords Transparency
Grey literature
Publication bias
Heterogeneity
Physiotherapy
Low reporting quality
Problem(s) Low reporting (PRISMA) quality
Grey literature excluded
Funding or sponsor of systematic review not reported
No registered or published protocol
Search strategy not provided
Poor consideration of publication bias
Inadequate analysis of heterogeneity
Number of systematic reviews included 88
Summary of Findings Reporting quality of the included 88 systematic reviews according to PRISMA guidelines was low. The greatest areas for concern were: protocol mentioned (11%), search strategy reported (43%); grey literature included (2%); publication bias discussed (25%); heterogeneity investigated (32%); funding sources reported (52%).
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