Multiple systematic reviews: Methods for assessing discordances of results

Internal and Emergency Medicine

Volumn 7, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 563-568

  Moja, Lorenzo ^a,b,c   Fernandez del Rio, M Pilar ^d   Banzi, Rita ^c   Cusi, Cristina ^e   D'Amico, Roberto ^f   Liberati, Alessandro ^f   Lodi, Giovanni ^a   Lucenteforte, Ersilia ^g   Minozzi, Silvia ^h   Pecoraro, Valentina ^c   Virgili, Gianni ^g   Parmelli, Elena ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

^b IRCCS ISTITUTO ORTOPEDICO GALEAZZI   (Italy)

^c MARIO NEGRI INSTITUTE FOR PHARMACOLOGICAL RESEARCH   (Italy)

^d Fundacion para la Formacion e Investigacion Sanitaria de la Region de Murcia (FFIS)   (Spain)

^e Regione Umbria ^*  (Italy)

^f UNIVERSITY OF MODENA AND REGGIO EMILIA   (Italy)

^g UNIVERSITY OF FLORENCE   (Italy)

^h ASL RM E   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84869177187     PISSN: 18280447     EISSN: 19709366     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11739-012-0846-1     Document Type: Editorial

References (24)

1. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG (2007) Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med 4(3): e78.
2. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH (1993) The science of reviewing research. Ann NY Acad Sci 703: 125-133 discussion 133-124.
3. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC (1992) A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA 268(2): 240-248.
4. Jadad AR, Cook DJ, Browman GP (1997) A guide to interpreting discordant systematic reviews. CMAJ 156(10): 1411-1416.
5. Clinical Evidence Study design search filters. Available at http://clinicalevidence. bmj. com/x/set/static/ebm/learn/665076. html.
6. Haynes RB, Wilczynski N, McKibbon KA, Walker CJ, Sinclair JC (1994) Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound studies in MEDLINE. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1(6): 447-458.
7. Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C (1994) Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ 309(6964): 1286-1291.
8. Chalmers I (1993) The Cochrane Collaboration: preparing, maintaining, and disseminating systematic reviews of the effects of health care. Ann N Y Acad Sci 703: 156-165.
9. Poolman RW, Abouali JA, Conter HJ, Bhandari M (2007) Overlapping systematic reviews of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction comparing hamstring autograft with bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft: why are they different? J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(7): 1542-1552.
10. Borenstein M, Hedges L, Higgins J, Rothstein H (2009) Introduction to meta-analysis. Wiley, West Sussex.
11. Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG (2004) Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 291(20): 2457-2465.
12. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327(7414): 557-560.
13. Yusuf S, Wittes J, Probstfield J, Tyroler HA (1991) Analysis and interpretation of treatment effects in subgroups of patients in randomized clinical trials. JAMA 266(1): 93-98.
14. Li LC, Moja L, Romero A, Sayre EC, Grimshaw JM (2009) Nonrandomized quality improvement intervention trials might overstate the strength of causal inference of their findings. J Clin Epidemiol 62(9): 959-966.
15. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, Schunemann HJ (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336(7650): 924-926.
16. Bhandari M, Devereaux PJ, Montori V, Cina C, Tandan V, Guyatt GH (2004) Users' guide to the surgical literature: how to use a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Can J Surg 47(1): 60-67.
17. Collins JA, Fauser BCJM (2005) Balancing the strengths of systematic and narrative reviews. Hum Reprod Updat 11(2): 103-104.
18. Halligan S, Altman DG (2007) Evidence-based practice in radiology: steps 3 and 4-appraise and apply systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Radiology 243(1): 13-27.
19. Mulrow CD (1987) The medical review article: state of the science. Ann Intern Med 106(3): 485-488.
20. Hillier TLB, Jadad AR (1996) The measurement of clinical pain: an appraisal of published reviews. In: Abstracts of the eighth world congress on pain. The international association for the study of pain press, Seattle, p 304.
21. Errami M, Sun Z, Long TC, George AC, Garner HR (2009) Deja vu: a database of highly similar citations in the scientific literature. Nucl Acids Res 37(suppl_1): D921-D924.
22. von Elm E, Poglia G, Walder B, Tramer MR (2004) Different patterns of duplicate publication: an analysis of articles used in systematic reviews. JAMA 291(8): 974-980.
23. International Committee of Medical Journal E (1997) Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. N Engl J Med 336(4): 309-316.
24. National Institutes of health, National Library of Medicine. Fact sheet: errata, retractions, partial retractions, corrected and republished articles, duplicate publications, comments (including author replies), updates, patient summaries, and republished (reprinted) articles policy for MEDLINE®. Available at http://www. nlm. nih. gov/pubs/factsheets/errata. html.