Selecting and appraising studies for a systematic review

Annals of Internal Medicine

Volumn 127, Issue 7, 1997, Pages 531-537

  Meade, Maureen O ^a   Richardson, W Scott ^b  

^a ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND DENTISTRY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; REVIEW;

EID: 0347453077     PISSN: 00034819     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-127-7-199710010-00005     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Counsell C. Formulating the questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:380-7.
2. Oxman AD, ed. Section VI: Preparing and Maintaining Systematic Reviews: The Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration; 1994:28-40.
3. Richardson WS, Wilson MC, Nishikawa J, Hayward RS. The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions [Editorial]. ACP J Club. 1995;123:A12-3.
4. Oxman AD, Sackett DL, Guyatt GH. Users' guides to the medical literature. I. How to get started. The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1993;270:2093-5.
5. Chalmers TC, Levin H, Sacks HS, Reitman D, Berrier J, Nagalingam R. Meta-analysis of clinical trials as a scientific discipline. I: Control of bias and comparison with large co-operative trials. Stat Med. 1987;6:315-25.
6. Chalmers TC, Berrier J, Sacks HS, Levin H, Reitman D, Nagalingam R. Meta-analysis of clinical trials as a scientific discipline. II: Replicate variability and comparison of studies that agree and disagree. Stat Med. 1987;6:733-44.
7. Schulz K, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled clinical trials. JAMA. 1995;273:408-12.
8. Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Laupacis A, Sackett DL, Goldberg RJ. Clinical recommendations using levels of evidence for antithrombotic agents. Chest. 1995;108(4 Suppl):227S-30S.
9. Levine M, Walter S, Lee H, Haines T, Holbrook A, Moyer V. Users' guides to the medical literature IV. How to use an article about harm. The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1994;271:1615-9.
10. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Mathews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 1991;337:867-72.
11. Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Ryan G, Clifton J, Buckingham L, Willan A, et al. Should unpublished data be included in meta-analyses? Current convictions and controversies. JAMA. 1993;269:2749-53.
12. Scherer RW, Dickersin K, Langenberg P. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. A meta-analysis. JAMA. 1994;272:158-62.
13. Gotzsche P. Multiple publications of reports of drug trials. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1989;36:429-32.
14. Gregoire G, Derderian F, Le Lorier J. Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis: is there a Tower of Babel bias? J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:159-63.
15. Egger M, Zellwegger-Zahner T, Schneider M, Junker C, Lengeler C, Antes G. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet. 1997;350:326-9.
16. Ransohoff DF, Feinstein AR. Problems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. N Engl J Med. 1978;299:926-30.
17. Sacks HS, Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr. Randomized versus historical assignment in controlled clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 1983;309:1353-7.
18. Chalmers TC, Celano P, Sacks HS, Smith H Jr. Bias in treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 1983;309:1358-61.
19. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Grimes DA, Altman DG. Assessing the quality of randomization from reports of controlled trials published in obstetrics and gynecology journals. JAMA. 1994;272:125-8.
20. Schulz KF. Subverting randomization in clinical trials. JAMA. 1995;274:1456-8.
21. Altman DG, Dore CJ. Randomization and baseline comparisons in clinical trials. Lancet. 1990;335:149-53.
22. Williams DH, Davis CE. Reporting of assignment methods in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1994;15:294-8.
23. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16:62-73.
24. Chalmers TC, Smith H, Blackburn B, Silverman B, Schroeder B, Reitman D, et al. A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial. Control Clin Trials. 1981;2:31-49.
25. Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbe KA. Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65.
26. Emerson JD, Burdick E, Hoaglin DC, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. An empirical study of the possible relation of treatment differences to quality scores in controlled randomized clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1990;11: 339-52
27. Lau J. Combining data quantitatively in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997; [In press].
28. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Reliability. In: Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. 2d ed. Oxford: Oxford Univ Pr; 1995.
29. Altman DG. Measuring agreement. In: Practical Statistics for Medical Research. London: Chapman and Hall; 1991.
30. Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH. Users' guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1994;272:1367-71.
31. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carrol D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17:1-12.
32. Berlin JA, Miles CG, Crigliano MD, Conill AM, Goldmann DR, Horowitz DA, et al. Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? Results of a randomized trial. Online J Curr Clin Trials. Document no. 205.