| Ref ID | 928 |
| First Author | C. Chapelle |
| Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
| Year Of Publishing | 2023 |
| URL | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435623002184 |
| Keywords |
• Haematology • Risk of bias • Low methodological quality • Overlapping reviews/redundancy • Non-Cochrane reviews • Reproducibility |
| Problem(s) |
• Redundant / overlapping / duplicated review question; leads to research waste • High risk of bias (ROBIS) |
| Article Type | Empirical |
| Article Subtype | Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review |
| First Author Country | France |
| Checklists |
• ROBIS |
| Aim | To assess the bias and methodological quality of systematic reviews evaluating direct oral anticoagulants in patients treated for an acute venous thromboembolism indexed in PubMed from inception to January 31, 2022. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | From 144 included systematic reviews evaluating direct oral anticoagulants in patients treated for an acute venous thromboembolism indexed in PubMed from inception to January 31, 2022. 26 systematic reviews (18.1%) were classified as original, 87 (60.4%) as conceptual replications, and 31 (21.5%) as excessive replications (redundant). The risk of bias was high in 19 (73.1%) of the original systematic reviews, 65 (74.7%) of the conceptual replications, and 21 (67.7%) of the excessive replications. Compared to the original systematic reviews, the overall methodological quality was not improved in either conceptual or excessive replications. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 144 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 1223 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |