Table 2 Characteristics of the systematic reviews
From: Methods to perform systematic reviews of patient preferences: a literature survey
Characteristics of the systematic review (N = 29) | |
|---|---|
Number of databases searched | |
One, n (%) | 6 (21) |
Two, n (%) | 4 (14) |
Three to five, n (%) | 11 (38) |
More than five, n (%) | 8 (28) |
Database searched | |
PubMed or MEDLINE, n (%) | 29 (100) |
EMBASE, n (%) | 19 (66) |
CINAHL, n (%) | 9 (31) |
PsycINFO, n (%) | 9 (31) |
EconLit, n (%) | 8 (28) |
Other databases, n (%) | 14 (48) |
Searched for non-English articles, n (%) | 7 (24) |
Reported searching reference lists of included studies, n (%) | 14 (48) |
Reported searching for conference abstracts, unpublished studies or grey literature, n (%) | 6 (21) |
Reported methods used to assess study eligibility, n (%) | 25 (86) |
Reported assessing risk of bias or methodological quality of included studies, n (%) | 13 (45) |
Used quantitative methods (meta-analysis) to synthesize study data, n (%) | 0 (0) |
Funding sources listed | |
No funding, n (%) | 3 (10) |
Government, n (%) | 14 (48) |
Industry, n (%) | 9 (31) |
Others, n (%) | 5 (17) |
Unclear, n (%) | 2 (7) |