Reporting a systematic review

Chest

Volumn 137, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1240-1246

  Wieseler, Beate ^a   McGauran, Natalie ^a  

^a INSTITUTE FOR QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY IN HEALTH CARE IQWIG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA ANALYSIS; DATA EXTRACTION; EMBASE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDLINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 77951832126     PISSN: 00123692     EISSN: 19313543     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1378/chest.09-2625     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Green S, Higgins JPT, eds. Glossary. In: The Cochrane Collaboration. Version 4.2.5. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2005. http://www.cochrane.org/ resources/glossary.htm. Accessed February 14, 2010.
2. Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(5):376-380.
3. Straus S, Moher D. Registering systematic reviews. CMAJ. 2010;182(1):13-14.
4. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2007;4(3):0447-0455. (Pubitemid 46495312)
5. Moher D. Producing clear, accurate and transparent reports of systematic reviews: an attainable goal. Clin Evid (Online). 2008. http://group.bmj.com/ products/evidence-centre/evidence-based-medicine-resources/ Producing%20clear%20accurate%20-%20transparent%20reports%2020-10-08.pdf. Accessed February 14, 2010.
6. PLoS Medicine Editors. Many reviews are systematic but some are more transparent and completely reported than others. PLoS Med. 2007;4(3):0399-0400.
7. Wen J, Ren Y, Wang L, et al. The reporting quality of meta-analyses improves: a random sampling study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(8):770-775.
8. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.
9. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000100.
10. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet. 1999;354(9193):1896- 1900.
11. Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed February 14, 2010.
12. Chalmers I. The Cochrane Collaboration: preparing, maintaining, and disseminating systematic reviews of the effects of health care. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993;703:156-163. (Pubitemid 24149534)
13. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Chapter 6: searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. http://www.cochranehandbook.org. Accessed February 14, 2010.
14. Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ, eds. Chapter 7: selecting studies and collecting data. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. http://www.cochranehandbook.org. Accessed February 14, 2010.
15. 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(1):62-73.
16. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, eds. Chapter 8: assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed February 14, 2010.
17. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG, eds. Chapter 9: analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed February 14, 2010.
18. Moher D, Sterne J. Introduction to the new Cochrane 'Risk of Bias' tool in Reviews. Cochrane BMG Workshop. Edmonton, December 2007. http://www. chalmersresearch.com/bmg/docs/t1p2. pdf. Accessed November 4, 2009.
19. Foote M. How to make a good first impression: a proper introduction. Chest. 2006;130(6):1935-1937. (Pubitemid 46033456)
20. Foote M. Materials and methods: a recipe for success. Chest. 2008;133(1):291-293.
21. Foote M. The proof of the pudding: how to report results and write a good discussion. Chest. 2009;135(3):866-868.
22. Foote M. Some concrete ideas about manuscript abstracts. Chest. 2006;129(5):1375-1377.
23. Wagner PD. Writing up your research results for publication. Chest. 2009;136(2):639-642.
24. Hamilton CW. On the table: form and function. Chest. 2009;135(4):1087- 1089.
25. Hall GM. How to Write a Paper. 4th ed. London, England: BMJ Books; 2008.
26. Byrne DW. Publishing Your Medical Research Paper: What They Don't Teach You in Medical School. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1997.
27. Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Higgins JPT, et al. Chapter 11: presenting results and 'Summary of findings' tables. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed February 14, 2010.
28. Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group. Study selection, quality assessment and data extraction form. http://cfgd.cochrane.org/Files/ Study%20selection%20and%20%20extraction%20form.doc. Accessed November 4, 2009.
29. Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Chapter 4: guide to the contents of a Cochrane protocol and review. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed February 14, 2010.
30. Peat J, Elliot E, Baur L, et al. Scientific Writing: Easy When You Know How. London, England: BMJ Books; 2005.
31. Durbin CG Jr. Effective use of tables and figures in abstracts, presentations, and papers. Respir Care. 2004;49(10):1233-1237.
32. Shun-Shin M, Thompson M, Heneghan C, Perera R, Harnden A, Mant D. Neuraminidase inhibitors for treatment and prophylaxis of influenza in children: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2009;339:b3172.
33. Lang TA, Secic M. How to Report Statistics in Medicine. Philadelphia, PA: American College of Physicians; 2006.
34. Hopewell S, McDonald S, Clarke M, Egger M. Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007(2):MR000010. (Pubitemid 351805776)
35. McAuley L, Pham B, Tugwell P, Moher D. Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses? Lancet. 2000;356(9237):1228-1231.
36. Turner EH, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, Tell RA, Rosenthal R. Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(3):252-260.
37. Song F, Eastwood AJ, Gilbody S, et al. Publication and related biases. Health Technol Assess. 2000;4(10):1-115.
38. Brown P, Brunnhuber K, Chalkidou K, et al. How to formulate research recommendations. BMJ. 2006;333(7572):804-806.
39. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10.