We conducted a PubMed search of MEDLINE for systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses published in The Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology, Journal of the American Medical Association: Otolaryngology – Head & Neck Surgery, The Laryngoscope, and/or Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery: Official Journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2015. We used the following search string: ((systematic review[Title/Abstract] OR meta-analysis[Title/Abstract]) OR meta-analysis[Publication Type]) AND ((("The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology"[Journal] OR "JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery"[Journal]) OR "The Laryngoscope"[Journal]) OR "Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery"[Journal]) AND ("2008/01/01"[PDAT] : "2015/12/31"[PDAT]). This search strategy was a modification of Montori et al., which has shown to be sensitive to identifying systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This search was conducted on October 7, 2015. This search yielded 310 studies. The Abstracts of these studies were screened for relevance, and 54 were discarded per the reasons listed in Fig. 1. The remaining 256 studies were subjected to a full-text screen and coding. Seventeen were discarded per the reasons listed in fig. 1, and the remaining 239 studies were coded on the following elements: (a) name of first author; (b) year of publication; (c) journal title; (d) whether author addressed quality/risk of bias; (e) what tool was used for quality/risk of bias assessment; (f) whether the author used a custom method for quality/risk of bias assessment; (g) whether the studies used in the review were graded; (h) what scale was used for grading the studies; (i) whether low quality studies or studies with high risk of bias were found; (j) whether low quality studies or studies with high risk of bias were included in the review; (k) whether a follow-up analysis was conducted (subgroup analysis, meta-regression, and/or sensitivity analysis); (l) how the information was presented in the review (narrative, table, and/or figure).