2009 Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the cochrane back review group

Spine

Volumn 34, Issue 18, 2009, Pages 1929-1941

  Furlan, Andrea D ^a,b,c   Pennick, Victoria ^a,b   Bombardier, Claire ^a,b   Van Tulder, Maurits ^d  

^a INSTITUTE FOR WORK AND HEALTH   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c TORONTO REHABILITATION INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^d VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Back pain; Cochrane collaboration; Meta analysis; Method guidelines; Neck pain; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

COCHRANE LIBRARY; DATA ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; DATA EXTRACTION; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; LANGUAGE; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME VARIABLE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; SPINAL DISEASES;

EID: 69749109780     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b1c99f     Document Type: Review

References (69)

1. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet 1999;354:1896-1900
2. Assendelft WJ, Koes BW, Knipschild PG, et al. The relationship between methodological quality and conclusions in reviews of spinal manipulation. JAMA 1995;274:1942-1948
3. Furlan AD, Clarke J, Esmail R, et al. A critical review of reviews on the treatment of chronic low back pain. Spine 2001;26:E155-62.
4. Hoving JL, Gross AR, Gasner D, et al. A critical appraisal of review articles on the effectiveness of conservative treatment for neck pain. Spine 2001;26:196-205. (Pubitemid 32115612)
5. van Tulder MW, Assendelft WJ, Koes BW, et al. Method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane collaboration back review group for spinal disorders. Spine 1997;22:2323-2330 (Pubitemid 28069099)
6. van Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, et al. Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine 2003;28:1290-1299 (Pubitemid 36734620)
7. Higgins J, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.0 [updated February 2008].The Cochrane Collaboration; 2008.
8. Glanville JM, Lefebvre C, Miles JN, et al. How to identify randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE: ten years on. J Med Libr.Assoc 2006;94:130-136
9. Minozzi S, Pistotti V, Forni M. Searching for rehabilitation articles on MEDLINE and EMBASE: an example with cross-over design. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000;81:720-722 (Pubitemid 30349711)
10. Sampson M, Barrowman NJ, Moher D, et al. Should meta-analysts search Embase in addition to Medline? J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:943-955 (Pubitemid 37268081)
11. Woods D, Trewheellar K. Medline and Embase complement each other in literature searches. BMJ 1998;316:1166. (Pubitemid 28156472)
12. Suarez-Almazor ME, Belseck E, Homik J, et al. Identifying clinical trials in the medical literature with electronic databases: MEDLINE alone is not enough. Control Clin.Trials 2000;21:476-487 (Pubitemid 30702454)
13. Day D, Furlan A, Irvin E, et al. Simplified search strategies were effective in identifying clinical trials of pharmaceuticals and physical modalities. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:874-881 (Pubitemid 41115771)
14. Avenell A, Handoll HH, Grant AM. Lessons for search strategies from a systematic review, in The Cochrane Library, of nutritional supplementation trials in patients after hip fracture. Am J Clin Nutr 2001;73:505-510 (Pubitemid 32176499)
15. Bakkalbasi N, Bauer K, Glover J, et al. Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomed Digit Libr 2006;3:7. (Pubitemid 44199195)
16. Golder S, McIntosh HM, Duffy S, et al. Developing efficient search strategies to identify reports of adverse effects in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Health Info Libr J 2006;23:3-12.
17. Furlan AD, Irvin E, Bombardier C. Limited search strategies were effective in finding relevant nonrandomized studies. J Clin Epidemiol 2006;59:1303-1311 (Pubitemid 44708607)
18. Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJ, et al. Outcome measures for low back pain research: a proposal for standardized use. Spine 1998;23:2003-2013 (Pubitemid 28473499)
19. Egger M, Zellweger-Zahner T, Schneider M, et al. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet 1997;350:326-329 (Pubitemid 27351115)
20. Egger M, Ebrahim S, Smith GD. Where now for meta-analysis? Int J Epidemiol 2002;31:1-5. (Pubitemid 34284889)
21. 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;48:159-163
22. Juni P, Holenstein F, Sterne J, et al. Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study. Int J Epidemiol 2002;31:115-123 (Pubitemid 34284912)
23. Moher D, Pham B, Lawson ML, et al. The inclusion of reports of randomised trials published in languages other than English in systematic reviews. Health Technol.Assess 2003;7:1-90. (Pubitemid 38100606)
24. Pham B, Klassen TP, Lawson ML, et al. Language of publication restrictions in systematic reviews gave different results depending on whether the intervention was conventional or complementary. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:769-776 (Pubitemid 40966834)
25. Furlan AD, Tomlinson G, Jadad AA, et al. Methodological quality and homogeneity influenced agreement between randomized trials and nonrandomized studies of the same intervention for back pain. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:209-231
26. Colditz GA, Miller JN, Mosteller F. How study design affects outcomes in comparisons of therapy. I: Medical. Stat Med 1989;8:441-454 (Pubitemid 19105892)
27. Kunz R, Oxman AD. The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials. BMJ 1998;317:1185-1190 (Pubitemid 28488507)
28. Chalmers TC, Celano P, Sacks HS, et al. Bias in treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials. N Engl J Med 1983;309:1358-1361 (Pubitemid 14246558)
29. Miller JN, Colditz GA, Mosteller F. How study design affects outcomes in comparisons of therapy. II: Surgical. Stat Med 1989;8:455-466 (Pubitemid 19105893)
30. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, et al. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995;273:408-412
31. Tierney JF, Stewart LA. Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis. Int J Epidemiol 2005;34:79-87.
32. Boutron I, Moher D, Tugwell P, et al. A checklist to evaluate a report of a nonpharmacological trial (CLEAR NPT) was developed using consensus. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:1233-1240 (Pubitemid 41608539)
33. Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, et al. Balneotherapy and quality assessment: interobserver reliability of the Maastricht criteria list and the need for blinded quality assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 1998;51:335-341
34. van Tulder MW, Suttorp M, Morton S, et al. Empirical evidence of an association between internal validity and effect size in randomized controlled trials of low back pain. Spine 2009;34:1685-1692
35. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1-12. (Pubitemid 26120810)
36. Berlin JA. Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? University of Pennsylvania Meta-analysis Blinding Study Group. Lancet 1997;350:185-186
37. Hill CL, LaValley MP, Felson DT. Discrepancy between published report and actual conduct of randomized clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2002;55:783-786
38. Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, et al. Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:255-265
39. Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, et al. The art of quality assessment of RCTs included in systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2001;54:651-654
40. Normand SL. Meta-analysis: formulating, evaluating, combining, and reporting. Stat Med 1999;18:321-359
41. Whitehead A, Whitehead J. A general parametric approach to the meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Stat Med 1991;10:1665-1677
42. Sterne JA, Egger M, Smith GD. Systematic reviews in health care: investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis. BMJ 2001;323:101-105 (Pubitemid 32681979)
43. Tang JL, Liu JL. Misleading funnel plot for detection of bias in meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:477-484
44. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 1994;50:1088-1101
45. Egger M, Davey SG, Schneider M, et al, Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629-634 (Pubitemid 27387172)
46. Sterne JA, Egger M. Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: guidelines on choice of axis. J Clin Epidemiol 2001;54:1046-1055 (Pubitemid 32888370)
47. Engels EA, Schmid CH, Terrin N, et al. Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses. Stat Med 2000;19:1707-1728 (Pubitemid 30436058)
48. Williamson PR, Smith CT, Hutton JL, et al. Aggregate data meta-analysis with time-to-event outcomes. Stat Med 2002;21:3337-3351
49. Poole C, Greenland S. Random-effects meta-analyses are not always conservative. Am J Epidemiol 1999;150:469-475 (Pubitemid 29407230)
50. Hahn S, Williamson PR, Hutton JL, et al. Assessing the potential for bias in meta-analysis due to selective reporting of subgroup analyses within studies. Stat Med 2000;19:3325-3336 (Pubitemid 32056687)
51. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al; GRADE Working Group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004;328:1490.
52. Ostelo RW, Costa LO, Maher CG, et al. Rehabilitation after lumbar disc surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008:CD003007.
53. Furlan AD, Imamura M, Dryden T, et al. Massage for low-back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008:CD001929.
54. Sahar T, Cohen M, Ne'eman V, et al. Insoles for prevention and treatment of back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007:CD005275.
55. Gibson JNA, Waddell G. Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007:CD001350.
56. Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cook DJ. Users' guides to the medical literature. II. How to use an article about therapy or prevention. B. What were the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1994;271:59-63. (Pubitemid 24020582)
57. Shekelle PG, Andersson G, Bombardier C, et al. A brief introduction to the critical reading of the clinical literature. Spine 1994;19:2028S-31S. (Pubitemid 24321336)
58. Malmivaara A, Koes BW, Bouter LM, et al. Applicability and clinical relevance of results in randomized controlled trials: the Cochrane review on exercise therapy for low back pain as an example. Spine 2006;31:1405-1409 (Pubitemid 43880184)
59. Ostelo RW, Deyo RA, Stratford P, et al. Interpreting change scores for pain and functional status in low back pain: towards international consensus regarding minimal important change. Spine 2008;33:90-94
60. Bombardier C, Hayden J, Beaton DE. Minimal clinically important difference. Low back pain: outcome measures. J Rheumatol 2001;28:431-438 (Pubitemid 32165165)
61. Cohen J. Statistical Power analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 1st ed. New York,San Francisco,London: Academic Press; 1988:1-474.
62. Farrar JT, Young JP Jr, LaMoreaux L, et al. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain 2001;94:149-158 (Pubitemid 33016608)
63. Pool JJ, Ostelo RW, Hoving JL, et al. Minimal clinically important change of the Neck Disability Index and the Numerical Rating Scale for patients with neck pain. Spine 2007;32:3047-3051 (Pubitemid 350307290)
64. Stratford PW, Riddle DL, Binkley JM, et al. Using the Neck Disability Index to make decisions concerning individual patients. Physiother Can 1999; Spring:107-119
65. Airaksinen O, Brox JI, Cedraschi C, et al. Chapter 4. European guidelines for the management of chronic nonspecific low back pain. Eur.Spine J 2006;15(suppl 2):S192-300.
66. van Tulder M, Becker A, Bekkering T, et al. Chapter 3. European guidelines for the management of acute nonspecific low back pain in primary care. Eur.Spine J 2006;15(suppl 2):S169-91.
67. Burton AK, Balague F, Cardon G, et al. Chapter 2. European guidelines for prevention in low back pain: November 2004. Eur Spine J 2006;15(suppl 2):S136-68.
68. Chou R, Huffman LH. Nonpharmacologic therapies for acute and chronic low back pain: a review of the evidence for an American Pain Society/American College of Physicians clinical practice guideline. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:492-504. (Pubitemid 351664520)
69. Chou R, Huffman LH. Medications for acute and chronic low back pain: a review of the evidence for an American Pain Society/American College of Physicians clinical practice guideline. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:505-514 (Pubitemid 351664521)