Recent meta-analyses neglect previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses about the same topic: A systematic examination

BMC Medicine

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Helfer, Bartosz ^a   Prosser, Aaron ^b   Samara, Myrto T ^a   Geddes, John R ^c   Cipriani, Andrea ^c   Davis, John M ^d   Mavridis, Dimitris ^e,f   Salanti, Georgia ^e   Leucht, Stefan ^a  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b CENTRE FOR ADDICTION AND MENTAL HEALTH   (Canada)

^c WARNEFORD HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

^f UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

Author keywords

Meta analysis; Methodology; PRISMA statement; Research waste; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

AMSTAR SCORE; ARTICLE; HUMAN; INTRARATER RELIABILITY; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; META ANALYSIS; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PROBABILITY; PUBLICATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SCORING SYSTEM; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); LITERATURE;

HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84928531570     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17417015     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-015-0317-4     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. The science of reviewing research. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993;703:125-33.
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. Robinson KA, Goodman SN. A systematic examination of the citation of prior research in reports of randomized, controlled trials. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:50-5.
4. Clarke M, Hopewell S, Chalmers I. Clinical trials should begin and end with systematic reviews of relevant evidence: 12 years and waiting. Lancet. 2010;376:20-1.
5. Clarke M, Hopewell S. Many reports of randomised trials still don't begin or end with a systematic review of the relevant evidence. J Bahrain Med Soc. 2013;24:145-8.
6. Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet. 2009;374:86-9.
7. Chalmers I, Bracken MB, Djulbegovic B, Garattini S, Grant J, Gülmezoglu AM, et al. How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set. Lancet. 2014;383:156-65.
8. Ioannidis JP, Greenland S, Hlatky MA, Khoury MJ, Macleod MR, Moher D, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet. 2014;383:166-75.
9. Chang SM, Carey T, Kato EU, Guise J-M, Sanders GD. Identifying research needs for improving health care. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157:439-45.
10. Glasziou P, Altman DG, Bossuyt P, Boutron I, Clarke M, Julious S, et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet. 2014;383:267-76.
11. Greenberg SA. How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of citation network. BMJ. 2009;339:b2680.
12. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.
13. Centrum für Disease Management [ http://www.cfdm.de/media/doc/Protocol%20Quoting%20Habits%20of%20Meta-analyses.doc ].
14. Schardt C, Adams MB, Owens T, Keitz S, Fontelo P. Utilization of the PICO framework to improve searching PubMed for clinical questions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007;7:16.
15. Hempel S, Newberry SJ, Maher AR, Wang Z, Miles JN, Shanman R, et al. Probiotics for the prevention and treatment of antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2012;307:1959-69.
16. D'Souza AL, Rajkumar C, Cooke J, Bulpitt CJ. Probiotics in prevention of antibiotic associated diarrhoea: meta-analysis. BMJ. 2002;324:1361.
17. Makani H, Bangalore S, Desouza KA, Shah A, Messerli FH. Efficacy and safety of dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin system: meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ. 2013;346:f360.
18. Kunz R, Friedrich C, Wolbers M, Mann JF. Meta-analysis: effect of monotherapy and combination therapy with inhibitors of the renin angiotensin system on proteinuria in renal disease. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:30-48.
19. Fox BD, Kahn SR, Langleben D, Eisenberg MJ, Shimony A. Efficacy and safety of novel oral anticoagulants for treatment of acute venous thromboembolism: direct and adjusted indirect meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2012;345:e7498.
20. Loke YK, Kwok CS. Dabigatran and rivaroxaban for prevention of venous hromboembolism-systematic review and adjusted indirect comparison. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2011;36:111-24.
21. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;15:10.
22. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159-74.
23. Jones AP, Conroy E, Williamson PR, Clarke M, Gamble C. The use of systematic reviews in the planning, design and conduct of randomised trials: a retrospective cohort of NIHR HTA funded trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13:50.
24. Cooper N, Jones D, Sutton A. The use of systematic reviews when designing studies. Clin Trials. 2005;2:260-4.
25. Terry RF, Salm JF, Nannei C, Dye C. Creating a global observatory for health R&D. Science. 2014;345:1302-4.
26. Editorial. The impact factor game. PLoS Med. 2006;3:e291.
27. Seglen PO. Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ. 1997;314:498-502.
28. Bertamini M, Munafo MR. Bite-size science and its undesired side effects. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2012;7:67-71.
29. Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Sinclair JC, Hayward R, Cook DJ, Cook RJ. Users' guides to the medical literature IX: a method for grading health care recommendations. JAMA. 1995;274:1800-4.
30. Garg AX, Hackam D, Tonelli M. Systematic review and meta-analysis: when one study is just not enough. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2008;3:253-60.
31. Saha S, Saint S, Christakis DA. Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality? J Med Libr Assoc. 2003;91:42-6.
32. Huang X, Lin J, Demner-Fushman D. Evaluation of PICO as a knowledge representation for clinical questions. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006;2006:359-63.
33. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:b2700.
34. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c869.
35. Centre TNC. Review Manager (RevMan). 52nd ed. The Cochrane Collaboration: Copenhagen; 2012.
36. Booth A, Clarke M, Dooley G, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, et al. The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2012;1:2.
37. Siontis KC, Hernandez-Boussard T, Ioannidis JP. Overlapping meta-analyses on the same topic: survey of published studies. BMJ. 2013;347:f4501.
38. Chalmers I. The Lethal Consequences of Failing to Make Use of All Relevant Evidence about the Effects of Medical Treatments: The Need for Systematic Reviews. In: Rothwell P, editor. Treating Individuals: from Randomised Trials to Personalised Medicine. London: Lancet; 2007. p. 37-58.