Quality appraisal of systematic reviews of interventions for children with cerebral palsy reveals critically low confidence

Autor: Katherine D. Goss, Lynne Romeiser Logan, Charlene Butler, Kat Kolaski
Rok vydání: 2021
Předmět:
Zdroj: Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology. 63:1316-1326
ISSN: 1469-8749
0012-1622
DOI: 10.1111/dmcn.14949
Popis: AIM To evaluate the methodological quality of recent systematic reviews of interventions for children with cerebral palsy in order to determine the level of confidence in the reviews' conclusions. METHOD A comprehensive search of 22 databases identified eligible systematic reviews with and without meta-analysis published worldwide from 2015 to 2019. We independently extracted data and used A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2) to appraise methodological quality. RESULTS Eighty-three systematic reviews met strict eligibility criteria. Most were from Europe and Latin America and reported on rehabilitative interventions. AMSTAR-2 appraisal found critically low confidence in 88% (n=73) because of multiple and varied deficiencies. Only 7% (n=6) had no AMSTAR-2 critical domain deficiency. The number of systematic reviews increased fivefold from 2015 to 2019; however, quality did not improve over time. INTERPRETATION Most of these systematic reviews are considered unreliable according to AMSTAR-2. Current recommendations for treating children with CP based on these flawed systematic reviews need re-evaluation. Findings are comparable to reports from other areas of medicine, despite the general perception that systematic reviews are high-level evidence. The required use of current widely accepted guidance for conducting and reporting systematic reviews by authors, peer reviewers, and editors is critical to ensure reliable, unbiased, and transparent systematic reviews. What this paper adds Confidence was critically low in the conclusions of 88% of systematic reviews about interventions for children with cerebral palsy (CP). Quality issues in the sample were not limited to systematic reviews of non-randomized trials, or to those about certain populations of CP or interventions. The inclusion of meta-analysis did not improve the level of confidence in these systematic reviews. Numbers of systematic reviews on this topic increased over the 5 search years but their methodological quality did not improve.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: