- Framework of problems / Transparent
- Low reporting (PRISMA) quality
- Systematic review reporting quality within dermatology: Bibliometric trends compared with general medicine and general surgery from 2008 to 2017
Ref ID | 921 |
First Author | P. Govas |
Journal | JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2022 |
URL | https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2021.07.056 |
Keywords |
Surgery General medical Dermatology Low reporting quality Journalology/ Publication science |
Problem(s) |
Low reporting (PRISMA) quality |
Number of systematic reviews included | 67 |
Summary of Findings | From a research letter to the editor of a wider analysis of 2458 articles identified as "systematic reviews" from the top dermatology, general medicine, and general surgery journals between 2008-2014, only 67 could be deemed as “true systematic reviews” across all 3 specialties according to PRISMA guidelines. Only 34% (17/50) of dermatology, 42% (21/50) of general surgery, and 58% (29/50) of general medicine publications listed as systematic reviews could technically be classified as such. |
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 |