The inclusion of reports of randomised trials published in languages other than English in systematic reviews

Ref ID 94
First Author D. Moher
Journal HEALTH TECHNOL ASSESS
Year Of Publishing 2003
URL https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14670218/
Keywords Complimentary & Alternative
Language
Problem(s) Language restriction
Number of systematic reviews included 130
Summary of Findings Language restrictions did not appear to bias the estimates of a conventional intervention’s effectiveness but did affect the results of a complimentary and alternative systematic review. If languages other than English reports were excluded this resulted in a reduced intervention effect, 63% on average (difference in the ratio of odds ratios of intervention = 1.63; 95% confidence interval: 1.03 to 2.60).
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? Yes
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes