2013
DOI: 10.6061/clinics/2013(04)20
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Methodological quality of systematic reviews and clinical trials on women's health published in a Brazilian evidence-based health journal

Abstract: OBJECTIVES:To assess the quality of systematic reviews and clinical trials on women's health recently published in a Brazilian evidence-based health journal.METHOD:All systematic reviews and clinical trials on women's health published in the last five years in the Brazilian Journal of Evidence-based Health were retrieved. Two independent reviewers critically assessed the methodological quality of reviews and trials using AMSTAR and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Table, respectively.RESULTS:Systematic reviews and cl… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
1
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
1
1
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar to our findings, the quality of SRs has been found to be low to moderate in fields such as orthopedics, 22 urology, 23 pulmonology, 24,25 gastroenterology, 26 neurology, 27 psychiatry, 10 gynecology, 28 and orthodontics. 29 Common deficits that led to lower quality scores were the lack of assessment of publication bias, lack of declaration of conflicts of interest, and lack of providing an a priori protocol.…”
Section: Main Findingssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Similar to our findings, the quality of SRs has been found to be low to moderate in fields such as orthopedics, 22 urology, 23 pulmonology, 24,25 gastroenterology, 26 neurology, 27 psychiatry, 10 gynecology, 28 and orthodontics. 29 Common deficits that led to lower quality scores were the lack of assessment of publication bias, lack of declaration of conflicts of interest, and lack of providing an a priori protocol.…”
Section: Main Findingssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Thus, it is important to select works with good foundation, high methodological rigor and reliable sources of information for greater efficacy at the time of the therapeutic approach. 6,7 Evidence indicates that systematic reviews using the methodology proposed by the Cochrane collaboration have a greater methodological rigor when compared to studies that do not adopt this methodology. 8,9 Thus, the aim of the present research was to evaluate the methodological quality of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews on the treatment of individuals with rotator cuff dysfunctions and to compare, through AMSTAR, the quality of studies found in the Cochrane, PubMed (Publisher: Medline),EMBASE and Qinsight databases…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Desta forma, torna-se importante a seleção de trabalhos com boa fundamentação, alto rigor metodológico e fontes de informação confiáveis para uma maior eficácia no momento da abordagem terapêutica. 6,7 Evidências apontam que as revisões sistemáticas que utilizam a metodologia proposta pela colaboração Cochrane possuem um maior rigor metodológico quando comparadas aos trabalhos que não adotam esta metodologia. 8,9 Desta forma, o objetivo da presentepesquisa foi avaliar a qualidade metodológica das revisões sistemáticas Cochrane e não Cochrane, acerca do tratamento de indivíduos com disfunções do manguito rotador e comparar, através do AMSTAR, a qualidade dos estudos encontrados na base de dados Cochrane, PubMed (Publisher Medline), EMBASE e Qinsight…”
Section: Introductionunclassified