Abstract
This review of reviews aimed to evaluate the reporting quality of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the field of sports physical therapy using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. This review of reviews included a literature search; in total, 2047 studies published between January 2015 and December 2020 in the top three journals related to sports physical therapy were screened. Among the 125 identified articles, 47 studies on sports physical therapy were included in the analysis (2 systematic reviews and 45 meta-analyses). There were several problems areas, including a lack of reporting for key components of the structured summary (10/47, 21.3%), protocol and registration (18/47, 38.3%), risk of bias in individual studies (28/47, 59.6%), risk of bias across studies (24/47, 51.1%), effect size and variance calculations (5/47, 10.6%), additional analyses (25/47, 53.2%), and funding (10/47, 21.3%). The quality of the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies on sports physical therapy was low to moderate. For better evidence-based practice in sports physical therapy, both authors and readers should examine assumptions in more detail, and report valid and adequate results. The PRISMA guideline should be used more extensively to improve reporting practices in sports physical therapy.
Highlights
Evidence-based practice (EBP) is the best decision-making method for patients [1].The term “evidence-based medicine” was first introduced by Gordon Guyatt at McMasterUniversity, in Canada in 1992 [2]
We excluded five narrative review articles, two articles that reported a rate, three articles that reported a ratio, two articles that reported the prevalence, one article that reported intraclass correlation coefficients, one article that reported reliability and validity, and one article that presented the diagnostic accuracy of a clinical test
This review evaluated 47 MAs and SRs reported in the Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, Journal of Athletic Training, and Physical Therapy in Sports related to sports physical therapy, using the PRISMA guidelines
Summary
Evidence-based practice (EBP) is the best decision-making method for patients [1].The term “evidence-based medicine” was first introduced by Gordon Guyatt at McMasterUniversity, in Canada in 1992 [2]. Evidence-based practice (EBP) is the best decision-making method for patients [1]. Primary studies have several limitations in terms of clinical decision-making, e.g., a limited sample, mixed results, and inconsistent analytical methods and reporting [5]. Some scientific journals even tend to selectively publish thesis manuscripts with statistically significant results [6]. This may induce biases, such as result reporting bias, which may affect the validity of the results [4,7]. Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see item 12) Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally with a flow diagram.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
