| Tang, 201816 |
|---|
The research questions and inclusion criteria for the review included the components of PICO Two databases were searched and keywords were provided for the literature search Study selection was performed in duplicate Reasons for excluding studies were given (without an accompanying list of studies) Included studies were described in adequate detail Appropriate methods for statistical combination of results were used (random effects model used when I2 ≥ 50%) No publication bias was found when Egger’s test was used (also assessed using funnel plot) The review authors reported no competing interests
| It is unclear whether review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review No explanation was given for the inclusion of cohort study designs only The literature search did not include trial registries, grey literature, or a search of reference lists in included studies Data extraction was not performed in duplicate Risk of bias in the individual studies was not assessed Sources of funding were not reported for the included studies Heterogeneity in some of the results was not explained
|
| Gayet, 201614 |
|---|
The research questions and inclusion criteria for the review included the components of PICO Neither RCTs nor non-randomized studies were excluded Multiple databases were searched and keywords were provided for the literature search Study selection was performed in duplicate Reasons for excluding studies were given (without an accompanying list of studies) Included studies were described in adequate detail QUADAS-2 was used to assess the risk of bias of included studies Reasons for high risk of bias were discussed Heterogeneity in the results and its likely sources were discussed The review authors reported no conflicts of interest
| It is unclear whether review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review The literature search did not include trial registries, grey literature, or a search of reference lists in included studies Data extraction was not performed in duplicate The review authors did not assess the potential impact of risk of bias in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis Sources of funding were not reported for the included studies
|
| Schoots, 201515 |
|---|
The research questions and inclusion criteria for the review included the components of PICO The review authors explained their use of cohort study designs in which patients received both interventions Multiple databases were searched, keywords were provided for the literature search, and reference lists of included studies were searched Study selection was performed in duplicate Reasons for excluding studies were given (without an accompanying list of studies) Included studies were described in adequate detail QUADAS was used to assess the risk of bias of included studies Appropriate methods for statistical combination of results were used The review authors accounted for study quality when discussing the results Pre-specified subgroup analyses were performed Heterogeneity in the results and its likely sources and impacts were discussed The potential impact of risk of bias in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis was discussed No publication bias was found when Egger’s test was used (also assessed using funnel plot) The review authors reported no competing interests
| It is unclear whether review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review The literature search did not include trial registries or grey literature It is unclear whether data extraction was performed in duplicate Sources of funding were not reported for the included studies
|
| Wu, 201519 |
|---|
The research questions and inclusion criteria for the review included the components of PICO Neither RCTs nor non-randomized studies were excluded Multiple databases were searched, keywords were provided for the literature search, and reference lists of included studies were searched Study selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate Reasons for excluding studies were given (without an accompanying list of studies) Included studies were described in adequate detail QUADAS-2 was used to assess the risk of bias of included studies Appropriate methods for statistical combination of results were used Studies with a high risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 tool were excluded Risk of bias was noted in the discussion due to the use of TRUS-guided biopsy as the reference standard (see Limitations) Heterogeneity was discussed for results with I2 ≥ 50% No publication bias was found when Egger’s test and Begg’s test were used (also assessed using funnel plot) The review authors reported no conflicts of interest
| It is unclear whether review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review The literature search did not include trial registries or grey literature Sources of funding were not reported for the included studies The review authors did not assess the potential impact of risk of bias in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis
|
| Van Hove, 201417 |
|---|
The research questions and inclusion criteria for the review included the components of PICO The review authors explained their use of RCTs or cohort study designs in which patients received both interventions Medical subject heading terms were provided for the PubMed search and reference lists of included studies were searched Included studies were described in adequate detail
| It is unclear whether review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review The literature search did not include multiple databases, trial registries, or grey literature It is unclear whether study selection or data extraction were performed in duplicate A list of excluded studies was not provided There was no risk of bias assessment of the individual studies Heterogeneity in the results was not discussed Sources of funding were not reported for the included studies One of the review authors reported honoraria from medical imaging system manufacturers without mentioning how potential conflicts of interest were managed
|
