Skip to main content

Table 1 Table of characteristics by mechanism for assessing “quality”

From: Systematic review adherence to methodological or reporting quality

Characteristic   Reports using PRISMA
N = 13
Reports using QUOROM
N = 7
Reports using OQAQ
N = 26
Reports using AMSTAR
N = 27
All reports
N = 56
n % n % n % n % n %
Year of publication of methodological report 1996–2010 0 0 7 100 20 77 0 0 21 38
2010–2014 13 100 0 0 6 23 27 100 35 63
Number of assessed SRs across reports Median (IQR) 88 (37, 134)   61 (53, 107)   59 (31, 109)   46 (22, 106)   57 (30, 109)  
Range 10–487   10–161   10–200   10–369   10–487  
Were SRs of particular medical field? No 1 8 2 29 2 8 1 4 5 9
Yes 12 92 5 71 24 92 26 96 51 91
Intent of assessment MQ tool for MQ assessment 16 62 18 67 34 61
RQ tool for RQ assessment 2 15 2a 29 4 7
Both MQ and RQ (and appropriate use of tool, accordingly) 10 77 5 71 7 27 8 30 15 27
Used MQ tool for RQ assessment 1a 4 1 2
Used MQ tool for both MQ and RQ assessment 1 4 1 2
Used MQ tools plus other criteria; both MQ and RQ assessedb 1c 4 1c 4 1 2
Used RQ tool for both MQ and RQ assessment 1 8 1 2
Cohort of Cochrane SRs Cochrane only 0 0 3 43 4 15 0 0 4 7
Sample of reviews 6 46 3 43 11 42 13 48 28 50
Specific journal sample or other 7 54 1 14 11 42 14 52 24 43
Number of databases searched 1 2 15 4 57 4 15 4 15 10 18
2 0 0 1 14 2 8 3 11 5 9
3 1 8 1 14 6 23 1 4 7 13
4 4 31 0 0 5 19 4 15 10 18
5 1 8 1 14 5 19 4 15 8 14
6 1 8 0 0 1 4 2 7 3 5
7 1 8 0 0 1 4 2 7 3 5
8+ 0 0 0 0 2 8 1 15 3 5
Not reported 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 2 4
Not applicable (select journals) 3 23 0 0 0 0 4 15 5 9
Reports restricted SRs by language No restrictions 2 15 2 29 12 46 4 15 15 27
Not reported 7 54 4 57 10 39 13 48 22 39
Restricted to English 1 8 1 14 6 23 7 26 13 23
Restricted to English and other specified languages 3 23 0 0 0 0 3 11 6 11
SR defined for inclusion criteria Not reported 2 15 1 14 7 27 6 22 12 21
Yes, but no reference given 4 31 1 14 5 19 5 19 10 18
“Systematic review” reported as a search term 5 39 4 57 13 50 9 33 24 43
Cochrane Collaboration and PRISMA Statement 2 15 1 14 2 8 5 19 7 13
Other reference 0 0 0 0 1 4 2 7 3 5
Was a study protocol reported as available for this report? No or not reported 11 85 6 86 24 92 24 89 49 88
Yes, link reported 2 15 0 0 1 4 1 4 2 4
Yes, upon request 0 0 1 14 3 12 2 7 5 9
Report source of funding Industry Funded 0 0 0 0 2 8 1 4 1 2
Non-profit Funding 7 54 3 43 13 50 10 37 26 46
Reported no funding 1 8 1 14 5 19 6 22 8 14
Not reported 5 39 3 43 10 39 10 37 21 38
  1. Note: columns are not mutually exclusive
  2. aOne study evaluated both QUOROM and OQAQ for RQ
  3. bUnclear from the study description whether MQ tools and/or additional criteria were used to assess the RQ aspect of the study
  4. cSame report