Reporting and methodological quality of COVID-19 systematic reviews needs to be improved: an evidence mapping
Study Design and Setting
What is new?
Overall, the reporting and methodological quality of the included SRs were low, especially the methodological quality.
The methodological quality of almost all SRs related to prevalence, etiology, prognosis, prevention, and special populations (such as children and pregnant women) were assessed as being low or critically low quality. The reporting quality of SRs related to treatment, prevention, and special populations was also relatively low.
Several evidence gaps were identified and a trend analysis of the clinical topics, countries, and study populations was performed.
What this adds to what was known?
This is the first study to assess the reporting and methodological quality of COVID-19 systematic reviews.
What is the implication, what should change now?
Considering the significance of systematic reviews of COVID-19, the reporting and methodological quality of these studies should be strengthened, especially the methodological quality. It is also necessary to discuss whether conventional quality assessment tools for systematic reviews are suitable during a public health emergency.