Time to update and quantitative changes in the results of cochrane pregnancy and childbirth reviews

PLoS ONE

Volumn 5, Issue 7, 2010, Pages

  Jaidee, Wanlop ^a   Moher, David ^b,c   Laopaiboon, Malinee ^d  

^a BURAPHA UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

^b OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^d KHON KAEN UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHILDBIRTH; COCHRANE LIBRARY; DEVELOPED COUNTRY; DEVELOPING COUNTRY; EFFECT SIZE; FETAL COMPLICATION; FETUS OUTCOME; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATION; PRENATAL CARE; PUERPERIUM; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; BIRTH; FEMALE; HUMAN; LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS; PUBLISHING; TIME;

FEMALE; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; PARTURITION; PREGNANCY; PUBLISHING; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 77955347391     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011553     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Shojania KG, Bero LA (2001) Taking advantage of the explosion of systematic reviews: an efficient MEDLINE search strategy. Effective Clinical Practice 4: 157-162.
2. Mulrow CD (1994) Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews. British Medical Journal 309: 597-599.
3. Chalmers I, Haynes B (1994) Systematic Reviews: Reporting, updating, and correcting systematic reviews of the effects of health care. British Medical Journal 309: 862-865.
4. Moher D, Tsertsvadze A (2006) Systematic reviews: when is an update an update? The Lancet 367: 881-883.
5. French S, McDonald S, McKenzie J, Green S (2005) Investing in updating: how do conclusions change when Cochrane systematic reviews are updated? BMC Medical Research Methodology 5: 33.
6. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG (2007) Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews. PLoS Medicine 4: e78.
7. Higgins J (1999) How Should We Interpret Updated Meta-analyses? Proceedings of the VII Cochrane Colloquium, Rome, Italy.
8. Stead L, Lancaster T, Silagy C (2001) Updating a systematic review - what difference did it make? Case study of nicotine replacement therapy. BMC Medical Research Methodology 1: 10.
9. Bastian H, Doust J, Brown R (2003) When does an updated meta-analysis have enough content to justify re-reading? Proceedings of the XI Cochrane Colloquium: Evidence, Health Care and Culture: Barcelona, Spain.
10. Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.0 [updated February 2008]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
11. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, et al. (2007) How Quickly Do Systematic Reviews Go Out of Date? A Survival Analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine: 224-233.
12. Liverpool Women's NHS Foundation Trust (2007) Cochrane Pregnancy & Childbirth Group. Available: http://www.lwh.me.uk/html/preg_childbirth_group.php. Accessed 10 March 20007.
13. Introduction to Cochrane pregnancy and childbirth review group. Available: http://www.lwh.org.uk/cochranepcg.htm. Accessed 10 September 2007.
14. The Cochrane Library Pregnancy and Childbirth Topic. Available: http://www.mrw.interscience.wiley.com/emrw/14651858/cochrane/topics?filter=PREG#PREG. Accessed 18 August, 2008.
15. Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2009) World Economic and Social Survey 2009: Promoting Development, Saving the Planet. New York: United Nations.
16. Silagy CA, Middleton P, Hopewell S (2002) Publishing Protocols of Systematic Reviews: Comparing What Was Done to What Was Planned. Journal of the American Medical Association 287: 2831-2834.
17. Cleves MA, William WG, Roberto GG (2002) An introduction to survival analysis using stata. College station. Tex: Stata Pr.
18. Henderson S, Hampson L, Atherton D, Neilson J (2006) Ten years of updating Cochrane reviews: the experiences of the Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Proceedings of the XIV Cochane Colloquium, Dublin, Ireland.