Skip to main content

Table 6 Methodological criteria fulfillment of the reviews (n = 84)

From: Current state of ethics literature synthesis: a systematic review of reviews

Search method

Selection method

Analysis method

Synthesis method

 

n =

 

n =

 

n =

 

n =

Statement of used databases (PRISMA item 7)

78 (93 %)

Statement of inclusion and/or exclusion criteria (PRISMA item 6)

68 (81 %)

Statement of identification of information unit (e.g., definition of what information is to be extracted) (PRISMA item 10)

55 (66 %)

Statement/description of a synthesis method (PRISMA item 14)

48 (57 %)

Statement of date/period of the search(es) (PRISMA item 7)

23 (27 %)

Statement of the selection procedure (e.g., who was selected and how) (PRISMA item 9)

29 (35 %)

Statement of procedure of (employing the) synthesis method (e.g., one or two people, dialogical processes) (PRISMA item 14)

15 (18 %)

Statement of used search terms and/or search strings (PRISMA item 8)

76 (91 %)

Statement of the procedure of information extraction (PRISMA item 10)

31 (37 %)

Representation of search procedure as a flowchart (PRISMA item 17)

24 (29 %)

Statement of used search restrictions (e.g., publication dates, languages) (PRISMA item 8)

50 (59 %)

Statement of found/included study/paper characteristics (PRISMA item 18)

45 (54 %)

Statement of the kind of theoretical (ethical) approaches used for defining information units (PRISMA item 11)

21 (25 %)

How many hits found (PRISMA item 17)

50 (59 %)

How many hits included (PRISMA item 17)

63 (75 %)

Illustration/representation of a synthesis result (PRISMA item 21)

63 (75 %)

Statement of additional search strategies used (additional criteria)

50 (59 %)

No criteria fulfilled

1 (1 %)

No criteria fulfilled

7 (8 %)

No criteria fulfilled

26 (31 %)

No criteria fulfilled

8 (10 %)

All criteria fulfilled

7 (8 %)

All criteria fulfilled

18 (21 %)

All criteria fulfilled

7 (8 %)

All criteria fulfilled

9 (11 %)