Skip to main content
. 2012 Nov 15;7(11):e49667. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0049667

Table 1. Description of overviews published in the health care literature and in Evidence-based Child Health: A Cochrane Review Journal (n and % reported unless otherwise indicated).

Health Care Literature, N = 51 Evidence-based Child Health, N = 24 Total, N = 75
Interventions Included
Pharmacological only 14 (27.5) 6 (25.0) 20 (26.7)
Non-pharmacological only 22 (43.1) 3 (12.5) 25 (33.3)
Both 15 (29.4) 15 (62.5) 30 (40.0)
Objectives Clearly Stated 51 (100) 23 (95.8) 74 (98.7)
Inclusion Criteria Clearly Stated 42 (82.4) 23 (95.8) 65 (86.7)
Comprehensive Search Strategy
≥2 Databases 32 (62.7) 1 (4.2) 33 (44.0)
Years and databases reported 37 (72.5) 9 (37.5) 46 (61.3)
Search strategy/Key words 35 (68.6) 23 (95.8) 58 (77.3)
Search Restrictions
Restricted to Cochrane only 16 (31.4) 23 (95.8) 39 (52.0)
Restricted by year 16 (31.4) 1 (4.2) 17 (22.7)
Restricted to published literature 11 (21.6) 21 (87.5) 32 (42.7)
Selection Methods
Reported 27 (52.9) 10 (41.7) 37 (49.3)
2 authors 23 (45.1) 6 (25.0) 29 (38.7)
1 author n/a 3 (12.5) 3 (4.0)
Other 4 (7.8) 1* (4.2) 5 (6.7)
Number Included
Systematic reviews, median (range) 8 (0–153) 5 (2–11) 6 (0–153)
Primary studies, median (range) 78 (0–2,062) 35 (4–230) 56 (0–2,062)
Study participants, range 411 to>300,000 618 to 18,581 411 to>300,000
Characteristics of Included SRs
SRs of RCTs only 20 (39.2) 12 (50.0) 32 (42.7)
List of SRs provided 44 (86.3) 24 (100) 68 (90.7)
List of excluded studies 11 (21.6) 9 (37.5) 20 (26.7)
Data Extraction Methods
Reported 26 (51.0) 19 (79.2) 45 (60.0)
2 authors 21 (41.2) 12 (50.0) 33 (44.0)
1 author 1 (2.0) 4 (16.7) 5 (6.7)
Other methods 4 (7.8) 3 (12.5) 7 (9.3)
Quality and Risk of Bias Assessments of Individual studies
Extracted from original SRs 9 (17.6) 18 (75.0) 27 (36.0)
-methods reported 6 (11.8) 2 (8.3) 8 (10.7)
-double independent assessment 2 (8.3) 2 (2.7)
Performed by overview authors 0 (0.0) 2 (8.3) 2 (2.7)
-methods reported 1 (4.2) 1 (1.3)
-double independent assessment 1 (4.2) 1 (1.3)
Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews
Assessed by overview authors 26 (51.0) 2 (8.3) 28 (37.3)
Reported use of specific tools 26 (51.0) 2 (8.3) 28 (37.3)
-Oxman and Guyatt 8 (15.7) 0 (0.0) 8 (10.7)
-AMSTAR 6 (11.8) 1 (4.2) 7 (9.3)
-QUOROM 3 (5.9) 0 (0.0) 3 (4.0)
Methods reported 21 (41.2) 2 (8.3) 23 (30.7)
-double independent assessment 19 (37.3) 2 (8.3) 21 (28.0)
Grading of Evidence
Extracted from SRs 1 (2.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.3)
Performed by overview authors 9 (17.6) 4 (16.7) 13 (17.3)
Reported use of specific tool (all used GRADE) 8 (15.7) 4 (16.7) 12 (16.0)
Methods
-not reported 2 (3.9) 2 (8.3) 4 (5.3)
-double independent assessment 5 (9.8) 1 (4.2) 6 (8.0)
-single independent assessment 2 (3.9) 1 (4.2) 3 (4.0)
Synthesis
Included characteristics on participants, interventions and outcomes 37 (72.5) 22 (91.7) 59 (78.7)
Analysis
Quantitative analysis across SRs 2 (3.9) 0 (0.0) 2 (2.7)
Publication Bias
Discussed 14 (27.5) 4 (16.7) 18 (24.0)
Source of Funding
Reported 26 (51.0) 4 (16.7) 30 (40.0)
-industry (n and % of those reporting funding) 4 (13.3) 2 (40.0) 6 (20.0)
-government (n and % of those reporting funding) 15 (50.0) 2 (40.0) 17 (22.7)
-institutional (n and % of those reporting funding) 3 (10.0) 1 (20.0) 4 (13.3)
-internal (n and % of those reporting funding) 2 (6.7) 0 2 (6.7)
-other (n and % of those reporting funding) 1 (3.3) 0 1 (3.3)
-no funding (n and % of those reporting funding) 5 (16.7) 0 5 (16.7)
*

All authors in consultation with relevant Cochrane Review Group.