Reflections on the history of systematic reviews

BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2018, Pages 121-122

  Clarke, Mike ^a   Chalmers, Iain ^b  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

^b James Lind Initiative   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

epidemiology

Indexed keywords

EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HISTORY;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HISTORY, 18TH CENTURY; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; HISTORY, 21ST CENTURY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85054331814     PISSN: 2515446X     EISSN: 25154478     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2018-110968     Document Type: Editorial

References (24)

1. Lee WL, Bausell RB, Berman BM. The growth of health-related metaanalyses published from 1980 to 2000. Eval Health Prof 2001;24:327-35.
2. Gurevitch J, Koricheva J, Nakagawa S, et al. Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis. Nature 2018;555:175-82.
3. Page MJ, Shamseer L, Tricco AC. Registration of systematic reviews in PROSPERO: 30,000 records and counting. Syst Rev 2018;7:32.
4. Chalmers I, Hedges LV, Cooper H. A brief history of research synthesis. Eval Health Prof 2002;25:12-37.
5. Clarke M. History of evidence synthesis to assess treatment effects: personal reflections on something that is very much alive. J R Soc Med 2016;109:154-63.
6. Starr M, Chalmers I, Clarke M, et al. The origins, evolution, and future of The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2009;25(Suppl 1):182-95.
7. Lind J. A treatise on the scurvy. In: Three parts, containing an inquiry into the nature, causes, an cure, of that disease, together with a critical and chronological view of what has been published on the subject. Edinburgh: Printed by Sands, Murray and Cochran for A Kincaid and A Donaldson, 1753.
8. Ioannidis JP, Greenland S, Hlatky MA, et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet 2014;383:166-75.
9. WHO. WHO handbook for guideline development-2nd edition. 2014 http:// apps. who. int/ medicinedocs/ documents/ s22083en/ s22083en. pdf
10. Ioannidis JP. The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. Milbank Q 2016;94:485-514.
11. Glass GV. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educ Res 1976;5:3-8.
12. Boylston A. Thomas Nettleton and the dawn of quantitative assessments of the effects of medical interventions.-JLL Bulletin: Commentaries on the history of treatment evaluation. The James Lind Library. 2010 http:// www. jameslindlibrary. org/ articles/ thomas-nettleton-and-the-dawnof-quantitative-assessments-of-the-effects-of-medical-interventions/ (accessed 13 Apr 2018).
13. Huth E. Quantitative evidence for judgments on the efficacy of inoculation for the prevention of smallpox: England and New England in the 1700s-The James Lind Library. 2005 http://www. jameslindlibrary. org/ articles/ quantitative-evidence-for-judgments-on-the-efficacy-of-inoculation-forthe-prevention-of-smallpox-england-and-new-england-in-the-1700s/ (accessed 13 Apr 2018).
14. Jurin J. The James Lind Library 1724. 2010 http://www. jameslindlibrary. org/ jurin-j-1724/
15. Scheuchzer JG. An account of the success of inoculating the small-pox in Great Britain, for the years 1727 and 1728: With a comparison between the mortality of the natural small-pox, and the miscarriages in that practice; as also some general remarks on its progress-The James Lind Library. http:// www. jameslindlibrary. org/ scheuchzer-jg-1729/ (accessed 13 Apr 2018).
16. Pearson K. Report on Certain Enteric Fever Inoculation Statistics. Br Med J 1904;2:1243-6.
17. Park WH. The treatment of lobar pneumonia with refined specific antibacterial serum. J Am Med Assoc 1928;91:1503-8.
18. O'Rourke K. An historical perspective on meta-analysis: dealing quantitatively with varying study results. J R Soc Med 2007;100:579-82.
19. Lewis S, Clarke M. Forest plots: trying to see the wood and the trees. BMJ 2001;322:1479-80.
20. International Anticoagulant Review Group. Collaborative analysis of long-term anticoagulant administration after acute myocardial infarction. An international anticoagulant review group. Lancet 1970;1:203-9.
21. Goldacre B, Lane S, Mahtani KR, et al. Pharmaceutical companies' policies on access to trial data, results, and methods: audit study. BMJ 2017;358:j3334.
22. Tierney JF, Vale C, Riley R, et al. Individual Participant Data (IPD) metaanalyses of randomised controlled trials: guidance on their use. PLoS Med 2015;12:e1001855.
23. Lee AW. Review of mixed treatment comparisons in published systematic reviews shows marked increase since 2009. J Clin Epidemiol 2014;67:138-43.
24. Rayleigh L. Address by the Rt. Hon. Lord Rayleigh. In: Report of the fiftyfourth meeting of the british association for the advancement of science, 1885:3-23.