A review found heterogeneous approaches and insufficient reporting in overviews on adverse events

Objectives: To investigate reporting and methodological characteristics of overviews on adverse (drug-associated) events (AEs) of pharmacological interventions. Study Design and Setting: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to May 17, 2021 for overviews exclusively investigating AEs of pharmacological interventions. We extracted general, reporting, and methodological characteristics and analyzed data descriptively. Results: We included 27 overviews, 70% of which were published in 2016 or later. The most common nomenclature in the title was "overview'' (56%), followed by "umbrella review'' (26%). The median number of included systematic reviews (SRs) in each overview was 15 (interquartile range 7-34). Study selection methods were reported in 52%, methods for data extraction in 67%, and methods for critical appraisal in 63% of overviews. An assessment of methodological quality of included SRs was performed in 70% of overviews. Only 22% of overviews reported strategies for dealing with overlapping SRs. An assessment of the certainty of the evidence was performed in 33% of overviews. Conclusion: To ensure methodological rigor, authors of overviews on AEs should follow available guidance for the conduct and reporting of overviews. (C) 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.