2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.04.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Restricting evidence syntheses of interventions to English-language publications is a viable methodological shortcut for most medical topics: a systematic review

Abstract: Restricting evidence syntheses of interventions to Englishlanguage publications is a viable methodological shortcut for most medical topics: a systematic review,

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
82
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 119 publications
(82 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
82
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As aforementioned, we may have excluded randomized controlled trials that had implemented an ERAS framework in the management of their patients due to limited reporting within published manuscripts. We limited our search to English language publications, although recent evidence suggests that this is unlikely to have altered our findings 77. If the term ‘ERAS’, ‘fast-track’ or ‘accelerated recovery’ was not included in the title or abstract, it may not have appeared in our search.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As aforementioned, we may have excluded randomized controlled trials that had implemented an ERAS framework in the management of their patients due to limited reporting within published manuscripts. We limited our search to English language publications, although recent evidence suggests that this is unlikely to have altered our findings 77. If the term ‘ERAS’, ‘fast-track’ or ‘accelerated recovery’ was not included in the title or abstract, it may not have appeared in our search.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another limitation of our review is that the search strategy was limited to one language, one database, and 11 years of evidence, which may contribute to selection bias and the lack of studies conducted in LMICs. Generally, English-language restrictions have not been shown to impact the conclusions of systematic reviews [146]. Additionally, we decided a priori to not include "childhood" or "adult" in our search terms, even though the AYA age group can overlap with each of these more general definitions.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We limited our eligibility criteria to studies published in English, French and German. A recent systematic review reported a negligible impact on the effect estimates and conclusions of language restrictions for most medical topics ( Dobrescu et al, 2021 ). Nevertheless, we might missed studies published in languages other than English, French and German.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%