Characteristics, quality and volume of the first 5 months of the COVID-19 evidence synthesis infodemic: a meta-research study
Discussion
This meta-research of early published COVID-19 evidence syntheses found low-quality reviews being published at pace, often with short publication turnarounds. Despite being of low quality and many lacking robust methods, the reviews received substantial attention across both academic and public platforms, and the attention was not related to the quality of review methods.
Interpretation
Flaws in systematic review methods limit the validity of a review and the generalisability of its findings. Yet, by being reported as ‘systematic reviews’, many readers may well regard them as high-quality evidence, irrespective of the actual methods undertaken. The challenge especially in times such as this pandemic is to provide indications of trustworthiness in evidence that is available in ‘real time’.
PROSPERO registration number
CRD42020188822.
Source: Evidence-Based Medicine - Category: Internal Medicine Authors: Abbott, R., Bethel, A., Rogers, M., Whear, R., Orr, N., Shaw, L., Stein, K., Thompson Coon, J. Tags: Open access, COVID-19 Evidence synthesis Source Type: research
More News: Academia | COVID-19 | Databases & Libraries | Internal Medicine | Pandemics | Science | Study