Characterising umbrella reviews in paediatrics: A systematic analysis.

AIM

To characterise typical practices in conducting and reporting umbrella reviews in paediatrics.

METHODS

PubMed database was searched for umbrella reviews focusing on children (0-18 years) published from 1 January 2020 to 15 June 2024, regardless of the speciality. The included studies were assessed for reporting practices, result summarisation and critical appraisal methods.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine eligible umbrella reviews were included, of which 49 focused on interventions and 50 focused on epidemiology. The median number of included reviews in the umbrella reviews was 18 (range = 3-302), and statistical synthesis was performed in 32 studies. The most frequently used tool for critical appraisal of the included reviews was the updated Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) tool (n = 56); the original AMSTAR-1 tool was used in seven reviews, and the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool was used in 12 reviews. Evidence certainty was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework in 14 reviews and by the Ioannidis criteria in 18 reviews.

CONCLUSION

Umbrella reviews have heterogeneous characteristics in terms of reporting practices. Greater adherence to guidelines on conducting and reporting umbrella reviews is needed, particularly for improving critical appraisal methods.