Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of the included systematic reviews

From: Reporting of methods to prepare, pilot and perform data extraction in systematic reviews: analysis of a sample of 152 Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews

 

Total (n = 152)

Cochrane (n = 75)

Non-Cochrane (n = 77)

Number of authors

5 (4 to 7)

5 (4 to 6)

6 (4 to 9)

Update of a previous review

38 (25%)

38 (51%)

0 (0%)

Iteration of the update

 First

15 (10%)

15 (20%)

0 (0%)

 Second

9 (6%)

9 (11%)

0 (0%)

 Third

10 (7%)

10 (13%)

0 (0%)

 Fourth

4 (3%)

4 (5%)

0 (0%)

Number of included studies

11 (4.75 to 20)

6 (3 to 18)

15 (9 to 21)

Review Registered

n/a

n/a

36 (47%)

Protocol available

68 (45%)

67 (89%)

1 (1%)

Reported adherence to PRISMAa

63 (41%)

1 (1%)

62 (81%)

Country of corresponding author

 Australia

8 (5%)

8 (11%)

0 (0%)

 Canada

16 (11%)

9 (12%)

7 (9%)

 China

22 (14%)

1 (1%)

21 (27%)

 UK

26 (17%)

19 (25%)

7 (9%)

 USA

18 (12%)

6 (8%)

12 (16%)

 Other

62 (41%)

32 (43%)

30 (39%)

Funding source

 Non-commercial

98 (64%)

66 (88%)

32 (42%)

 Commercial

1 (1%)

0 (0%)

1 (1%)

 No funding

25 (16%)

3 (4%)

22 (29%)

 Not reported

28 (18%)

6 (8%)

22 (29%)

Data extraction form published

 Yes

10 (7%)

7 (9%)

3 (4%)

 No

142 (93%)

68 (91%)

74 (96%)

Number of reviewers involved in data extraction

 1

1 (1%)

0 (0%)

1 (1%)

 2

74 (49%)

36 (48%)

38 (49%)

 3

22 (14%)

18 (24%)

4 (5%)

 4

8 (5%)

6 (8%)

2 (3%)

 > 4

12 (8%)

9 (12%)

3 (4%)

 Not reported

35 (23%)

6 (8%)

29 (38%)

  1. Data given as number (percent) or median (25th to 75th percentile); percentages are rounded to the whole number; athis excludes cases where only use of the PRISMA flow-chart is mentioned; n/a not applicable