Preferred reporting items of systematic review and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement;Bevorzugte Report Items für systematische Übersichten und Meta-Analysen: Das PRISMA-Statement

Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift

Volumn 136, Issue 8, 2011, Pages

  Ziegler, A ^a   Antes, G ^b   Konig I R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN   (Germany)

^b Deutsches Cochrane Zentrum   (Germany)

Author keywords

evidence based practice; meta analyisis; publishing standards; quality control; systematic review

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); VOLUNTARY REPORTING;

EID: 79951638043     PISSN: 00120472     EISSN: 14394413     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1272978     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Altman D G., Schulz K F., Moher D et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and ela (Pubitemid 32322245)
2. Altman D G. Systematic reviews of evaluations of prognostic variables. BMJ 2001 323 224-228
3. Bagshaw S M., McAlister F A., Manns B J., Ghali W A. Acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy: a case study of the pitfalls in the evolution of evidence. Arch Intern Med 2006 166 161-166 (Pubitemid 43144938)
4. Bhandari M, Morrow F, Kulkarni A V., Tornetta III.P. Meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery. A systematic review of their methodologies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001 83-A 15-24 (Pubitemid 32116103)
5. Biondi-Zoccai G G., Lotrionte M, Abbate A et al. Compliance with QUOROM and quality of reporting of overlapping meta-analyses on the role of acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast associated nephropathy: case study. BMJ 2006 332 202-209
6. Bossuyt P M., Reitsma J B., Bruns D E. et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative. Ann Intern Med 2003 138 40-44 (Pubitemid 36232093)
7. Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Randomized controlled trials registration/application checklist (12/2006). 2006 http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/ documents/rct-reg-e.pdf [zugegriffen am 5.7.2010]
8. Chan A W., Hrobjartsson A, Haahr M T., Gotzsche P C., Altman D G. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 2004 291 2457-2465 (Pubitemid 38669189)
9. Chan A W., Krleza-Jeric K, Schmid I, Altman D G. Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CMAJ 2004 171 735-740 (Pubitemid 39319090)
10. Choi P T., Halpern S H., Malik N et al. Examining the evidence in anesthesia literature: a critical appraisal of systematic reviews. Anesth Analg 2001 92 700-709 (Pubitemid 32185115)
11. De Angelis C D., Drazen J M., Frizelle F A. et al. Is this clinical trial fully registered? A statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. CMAJ 2005 172 1700-1702 (Pubitemid 40896864)
12. Deeks J J. Systematic reviews in health care: Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests. BMJ 2001 323 157-162 (Pubitemid 32678396)
13. Delaney A, Bagshaw S M., Ferland A et al. A systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in the critical care literature. Crit Care 2005 9 R575-58
14. Dickersin K Publication bias: Recognizing the problem, understanding its origins and scope, and preventing harm. In: Publication bias in meta-analysis-Prevention, assessment and adjustments. Rothstein H R. Sutton A J. Borenstein M eds. Chichester (UK) John Wiley & Sons 2005 11-33
15. Green S, Higgins J. Glossary. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions 4.2.5. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2005 http://www.cochrane.org/ resources/glossary.htm [zugegriffen am 4.7.2010]
16. Guyatt G H., Oxman A D., Vist G E. et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008 336 924-926 (Pubitemid 351632017)
17. Ioannidis J P., Ntzani E E., Trikalinos T A., Contopoulos-Ioannidis D G. Replication validity of genetic association studies. Nat Genet 2001 29 306-309 (Pubitemid 33096456)
18. Kelly K D., Travers A, Dorgan M, Slater L, Rowe B H. Evaluating the quality of systematic reviews in the emergency medicine literature. Ann Emerg Med 2001 38 518-526 (Pubitemid 33041928)
19. Ladabaum U, Chopra C L., Huang G et al. Aspirin as an adjunct to screening for prevention of sporadic colorectal cancer. A cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med 2001 135 769-781 (Pubitemid 33051261)
20. Lau J, Ioannidis J P., Terrin N, Schmid C H., Olkin I. The case of the misleading funnel plot. BMJ 2006 333 597-600 (Pubitemid 44433638)
21. Lavis J, Davies H, Oxman A et al. Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making. J Health Serv Res Policy 2005 10 Suppl 1 35-48 (Pubitemid 40993883)
22. Liberati A, Altman D G., 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 e1000100
23. Moher D, Cook D J., 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
24. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco A C., Sampson M, Altman D G. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med 2007 4 e78
25. Moher D, Tsertsvadze A. Systematic reviews: when is an update an update? Lancet 2006 367 881-883
26. Moja L P., Telaro E, D'Amico R et al. Assessment of methodological quality of primary studies by systematic reviews: results of the metaquality cross sectional study. BMJ 2005 330 1053
27. Mulrow C D. The medical review article: state of the science. Ann Intern Med 1987 106 485-488
28. Oxman A D., Cook D J., Guyatt G H. Users' guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1994 272 1367-1371 (Pubitemid 24323620)
29. Richards D. The quality of systematic reviews in dentistry. Evid Based Dent 2004 5 17
30. Sacks H S., Berrier J, Reitman D, Ancona-Berk V A., Chalmers T C. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med 1987 316 450-455 (Pubitemid 17035572)
31. Sacks H S., Reitman D, Pagano D, Kupelnick B. Meta-analysis: an update. Mt Sinai J Med 1996 63 216-224 (Pubitemid 126526132)
32. Schünemann H J., Jaeschke R, Cook D J. et al. An official ATS statement: grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in ATS guidelines and recommendations. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006 174 605-614 (Pubitemid 44330555)
33. Silagy C A., Middleton P, Hopewell S. Publishing protocols of systematic reviews: comparing what was done to what was planned. JAMA 2002 287 2831-2834 (Pubitemid 34591977)
34. Stewart L A., Clarke M J. Practical methodology of meta-analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data. Cochrane Working Group. Stat Med 1995 14 2057-2079
35. Strech D, Tilburt J. Value judgments in the analysis and synthesis of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2008 61 521-524 (Pubitemid 351615535)
36. Sutton A J. Evidence concerning the consequences of publication and related biases. In: Rothstein HR, Sutton AJ, Borenstein M eds Publication bias in meta-analysis-Prevention, assessment and adjustments. Chichester (UK) John Wiley & Sons 2005 175-192
37. Swingler G H., Volmink J, Ioannidis J P. Number of published systematic reviews and global burden of disease: database analysis. BMJ 2003 327 1083-1084 (Pubitemid 37386710)
38. The Joanna Briggs Institute. Protocols & work in progress. 2008 http://www.joannabriggs.edu.au/pubs/systematic-reviews-prot.php [zugegriffen am 04.07.2010]
39. University of York. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. 2009 http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/ [zugegriffen am 4.7.2010]
40. Vandenbroucke J P., von Elm E, Altman D G. et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2007 147 W163-194 (Pubitemid 351664503)
41. Whittington C J., Kendall T, Fonagy P et al. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in childhood depression: systematic review of published versus unpublished data. Lancet 2004 363 1341-1345 (Pubitemid 38529872)
42. Young C, Horton R. Putting clinical trials into context. Lancet 2005 366 107-108 (Pubitemid 40991198)