The reporting completeness and transparency of systematic reviews of prognostic prediction models for COVID-19 was poor: a methodological overview of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a methodological overview of reviews in order to evaluate the reporting completeness and transparency of systematic reviews (SRs) of prognostic prediction models (PPMs) for COVID-19.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTINGS: MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Epistemonikos (epistemonikos.org) were searched for SRs of PPMs for COVID-19 until December 31, 2022. The ROBIS tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The protocol for this overview was uploaded in the Open Science Framework (OSF) (https://osf.io/7y94c).

RESULTS: Ten SRs were retrieved; none of them synthesized the results in a meta-analysis. For most of the studies there was the absence of a pre-defined protocol and missing information on study selection, data collection process and reporting of primary studies and models included, while only one SR had its data publicly available. . In addition, for the majority of the SRs the overall risk of bias was judged as being high. The overall corrected covered area (CCA) was 6.3% showing a small amount of overlapping among the SRs.

CONCLUSION: The reporting completeness and transparency of SRs of prognostic prediction models for COVID-19 was poor. Guidance is urgently required, with increased awareness and education of minimum reporting standards and quality criteria. Specific focus is needed in pre-defined protocol, information on study selection and data collection process and in the reporting of findings to improve the quality of SRs of PPMs for COVID-19.