Skip to main content

Table 1 Table of characteristics of reports presented by methodological quality or both methodological and reporting quality

From: Identifying approaches for assessing methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews: a descriptive study

Characteristic Categorization Reports assessing MQ only Reports assessing MQ and RQ or RQ only All reports
N = 50, n (%) N = 26, n (%) N = 76, n (%)
Year of publication 1993–2009 26 (52) 11 (42) 37 (49)
2010–2014 23 (46) 16 (62) 39 (51)
Number of assessed SRs Median (IQR) 43 (21, 88) 68 (36, 109) 51 (25, 105)
Range 10–327 10–487 10–487
Were SRs of particular medical field? Yes 45 (90) 21 (81) 66 (87)
No 5 (10) 5 (19) 10 (13)
Cohort of Cochrane SRs Cochrane only 2 (4) 3 (12) 5 (7)
Sample of reviews 23 (46) 10 (38) 33 (43)
Specific journal sample or other 25 (50) 13 (50) 38 (50)
Number of databases searched 1 9 (18) 8 (31) 17 (22)
2 5 (10) 2 (8) 7 (9)
3 7 (14) 2 (8) 9 (12)
4 7 (14) 5 (19) 12 (16)
5 5 (10) 3 (12) 8 (11)
6 2 (4) 2 (8) 4 (5)
7 5 (10) 1 (4) 6 (8)
8+ 3 (6) 1 (4) 3 (4)
Not reported 4 (8) 0 (0) 4 (5)
Not applicable (select journals) 3 (6) 3 (12) 5 (7)
Reports restricting SRs by language No restrictions 14 (28) 6 (23) 20 (26)
Restricted to English 14 (28) 4 (15) 18 (24)
Restricted to English and another specified languages 4 (8) 3 (12) 7 (9)
Not reported 18 (36) 13 (50) 31 (41)
SR defined for inclusion criteria? Yes, but no reference given 5 (10) 6 (23) 11 (15)
‘Systematic review’ reported as a search term 21 (42) 12 (46) 33 (43)
Cochrane collaboration and PRISMA Statement 4 (8) 5 (19) 9 (12)
Other reference 3 (6) 0 (0) 3 (4)
Not reported 17 (34) 3 (12) 20 (26)
Was a study protocol reported as available for this report? Yes, link reported 1 (2) 2 (8) 3 (4)
Yes, upon request 6 (12) 2 (8) 8 (11)
No or not reported 43 (86) 22 (85) 65 (86)
Report Source of funding Industry Funded 2 (4) 0 (0) 2 (3)
Non-profit Funding 21 (42) 14 (54) 35 (46)
Reported no funding 6 (12) 3 (12) 9 (12)
Not reported 21 (42) 9 (35) 30 (39)
  1. MQ methodological quality, RQ reporting quality