The scatter of research: Cross sectional comparison of randomised trials and systematic reviews across specialties

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 344, Issue 7861, 2012, Pages

  Hoffmann, Tammy ^a   Erueti, Chrissy ^a   Thorning, Sarah ^a   Glasziou, Paul ^a  

^a BOND UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICINE; CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE LUNG DISEASE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; HEARING LOSS; LUNG CANCER; MEDICAL LITERATURE; NEUROLOGY; OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); AUSTRALIA; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICINE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PUBLISHING; READING; STANDARD; STATISTICS;

AUSTRALIA; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; MEDICINE; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBLISHING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; READING; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84862490524     PISSN: 17561833     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.e3223     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Tsay M, Yang Y. Bibliometric analysis of the literature of randomised controlled trials. J Med Libr Assoc 2005;93:450-8. (Pubitemid 41702479)
2. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000326.
3. Bradford S. Sources of information on specific subjects 1934. J Info Sci 1985;10:176-80.
4. Garg AX, Iansavichus AV, Kastner M, Walters LA, Wilczynski N, McKibbon KA, et al. Lost in publication: half of all renal practice evidence is published in non-renal journals. Kidney Int 2006;70:1995-2005. (Pubitemid 44863389)
5. Tenopir C, King D, Clarke M, Kyoungsik N, Zhou X. Journal reading patterns and preferences of paediatricians. J Med Libr Assoc 2007;95:56-63. (Pubitemid 46409615)
6. Mathers C, Ma Fat D, Boerma T. The global burden of disease: 2004 update. World Health Organization, 2008.
7. McKibbon K, Wilczynski N, Haynes R: Hedges Team. Retrieving randomised controlled trials from MEDLINE: a comparison of 38 published search filters. Health Info Libr J 2008;26:187-202.
8. Mariani L, Marubini E. Content and quality of currently published phase II cancer trials. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:429-36. (Pubitemid 30056434)
9. Montori V, Wilczynski N, Morgan D, Haynes R: Hedges Team. Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ 2005;330:68.
10. Bailey P. The past, present and future of neurology in the United States. Neurology 2011;76:18-22.
11. Jones T, Hanney S, Buxton M, Burns T. What British psychiatrists read: questionnaire survey of journal usage among clinicians. Br J Psychiatry 2004;185:251-7. (Pubitemid 39208228)
12. Jones TH, Hanney S, Buxton MJ. The journals of importance to UK clinicians: a questionnaire survey of surgeons. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2006;6:24.
13. Schein M, Paladugu R, Sutija VG, Wise L. What American surgeons read: a survey of a thousand Fellows of the American College of Surgeons. Curr Surg 2000;57:252-8.
14. Burke DT, DeVito MC, Schneider JC, Julien S, Judelson A. Reading habits of physical medicine and rehabilitation resident physicians. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2004;88:551-9. (Pubitemid 38802326)
15. Jones TH, Hanney S, Buxton MJ. The information sources and journals consulted or read by UK paediatricians to inform their clinical practice and those which they consider important: a questionnaire survey. BMC Pediatr 2007;7:1.
16. McKibbon K, Haynes R, McKinlay R, Lokker C. Which journals do primary care physicians and specialists access from an online service? J Med Libr Assoc 2007;95:246-54. (Pubitemid 47105573)
17. Ioannidis J. Concentration of the most-cited papers in the scientific literature: analysis of journal ecosystems. PLoS One 2006;1:e5.
18. Gesme D, Wiseman M. Subspecialisation in community oncology: option or necessity? J Oncol Pract 2011;7:199-201.
19. Mabe M. The growth and number of journals. Serials 2003;16:191-7.
20. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000326.
21. Tricco A, Brehaut J, Chen M, Moher D. Following 411 Cochrane protocols to completion: a retrospective cohort study. PLoS One 2008;3:e3684.
22. McKinlay R, Cotoi C, Wilczynski N, Haynes R. Systematic reviews and original articles differ in relevance, novelty, and use in an evidence-based service for physicians: PLUS project. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:449-54. (Pubitemid 351446186)
23. Straus S, Moher D. Registering systematic reviews. CMAJ 2010;182:13-4.
24. Booth A, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L. An international registry of systematic review protocols. Lancet 2010;377:108-9.
25. Grad R, Pluye P, Johnson-Lafleur J, Granikov V, Shulha M, Bartlett G, et al. Do family physicians retrieve synopses of clinical research previously read as email alerts? J Med Internet Res 2011;13:e101.
26. Bennett S, McKenna K, Hoffmann T, Tooth L, McCluskey A, Strong J. The value of an evidence database for occupational therapists: an international online survey. Int J Med Inform 2007;76:507-13. (Pubitemid 46702800)
27. Bennett S, Hoffmann T, McCluskey A, McKenna K, Strong J, Tooth L. Introducing OTseeker (Occupational Therapy Systematic Evaluation of Evidence): a new evidence database for occupational therapists. Am J Occup Ther 2003;57:635-8. (Pubitemid 39273138)
28. Sherrington C, Herbert R, Maher C, Moseley A. PEDro. A database of randomised trials and systematic reviews in physiotherapy. Man Ther 2000;5:223-6.
29. Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet 2009;374:86-9.