| Ref ID | 912 |
| First Author | E. Tay |
| Journal | DRUG & ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE |
| Year Of Publishing | 2023 |
| URL | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0376871623001254?via%3Dihub |
| Keywords |
• Protocols • Pharmacological • Low methodological quality • Pre-specification • Transparency |
| Problem(s) |
• Lack of prespecification in eligibility criteria • Reasons for excluding potentially eligible studies not provided • Conflicts of interest or funding of included studies not assessed • No registered or published protocol • Undocumented or unjustified deviations to the review protocol • Low methodological (AMSTAR) quality |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | Australia |
| Aim | To 1) describe and identify the methods and outcome measures used to evaluate Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) and 2) summarise existing evidence on outcomes and factors that influence PDMP success or benefit realisation. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | From 12 included systematic reviews of prescription drug monitoring programs indexed across MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PROSPERO up to 26 March 2021. Half (n=6) of the included papers were rated as “critically low” methodological quality. The AMSTAR-2 items which were the least well reported were: no report availability/deviations from a protocol (58.3%); authors did not explain their selection of the study designs for inclusion (58.3%); authors did not provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions (100%); authors did not report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review (91.5%). |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 12 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 1408 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |