HCR-Critical Appraisal of Systematic Review with Meta Analysis

Critical Appraisal of Systematic Reviews with Meta-Analysis Complete the following information thoroughly and completely. No “yes” or “no” responses accepted. It is also not acceptable to copy and paste information from the article as this does not demonstrate synthesis and understanding of the research design (there will be a 25 point penalty – even if you place this information in quotes and reference it). If you fail to present a systematic review or a systematic review without a meta-analysis, there will be no grade assigned as it does not meet the critical first step – identification of a systematic review for analysis. You MUST submit a PDF of the full-text article with this critique (no links accepted). You MUST use the form for submission. A maximum of 20 points will be deducted for grammar and format as this affects quality and understanding of the information presented in this assignment. If the form is not used 20 points will be deducted. Article Critiqued: Parry-Strong, A., Wright-McNaughton, M., Weatherall, M., Hall, R. M., Coppell, K. J., Barthow, C., & Krebs, J. D. (2022). Very low carbohydrate (ketogenic) diets in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes, Obesity, and Metabolism, 24, 2431-2442. DOI: 10.1111/dom.14837. Measures Yes No Explanation 1 Are the results of the review valid? * Are the studies contained in the review randomized controlled trials? Yes Parry-Strong et al.’s study utilized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in assessing the effect of ketogenic diet or very low carbohydrate (VLC) on managing type 2 diabetes (Parry-Strong et al., 2022). * Does the review include a detailed description of the search strategy to find all the relevant studies? Yes Specifically, this study depicts a detailed search strategy that was used to gather all relevant studies. For example, some of the search terms used include type 2 diabetes, sugar diabetes, impaired glucose tolerance, and impaired fasting glycaemia (Parry-Strong et al., 2022). From the 2290 studies that were screened, researchers only chose 69 of them, which were found to have met the inclusion criteria (Parry-Strong et al., 2022). * Does the review describe how validity of the individual studies was assessed (e.g methodological quality, including the use of random assignment to study groups and complete follow-up of the subjects)? Yes...