article Open AccessTop 1% cited
Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews
PLoS Medicine · 2007 · Vol. 4(3) · pp. e78–e78
David Moher✉(Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario)Jennifer Tetzlaff(Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario)Andrea C. Tricco(Institute of Population and Public Health)Margaret Sampson(Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario)Douglas G. Altman
Abstract
SRs are now produced in large numbers, and our data suggest that the quality of their reporting is inconsistent. This situation might be improved if more widely agreed upon evidence-based reporting guidelines were endorsed and adhered to by authors and journals. These results substantiate the view that readers should not accept SRs uncritically.
Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsHealth Sciences Research and EducationDelphi Technique in ResearchEpidemiologyMedicineMEDLINESystematic reviewFamily medicineReporting biasPublication biasMeta-analysisPathology
MeSH terms
EpidemiologyHealth ServicesHealth Services ResearchHumansPeriodicals as TopicResearch DesignReview Literature as TopicBiasOutcome Assessment, Health CareEvidence-Based MedicineBiomedical Research
Funding
- University of Ottawa
- Cancer Research UK
- National Institutes of Health
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research
- U.S. National Library of Medicine
Citations
902
FWCI
53.36
field-weighted impact
References
36
Percentile
100%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
Cited by
The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations
Annals of Internal Medicine · 2015 · 7,821 citations
The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration
Annals of Internal Medicine · 2009 · 10,387 citations
Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care
The Lancet Infectious Diseases · 2010 · 3,272 citations
Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive—Trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses
International Journal of Epidemiology · 2008 · 946 citations
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation
BMJ · 2015 · 12,938 citations
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
BMJ · 2009 · 82,871 citations
The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration
PLoS Medicine · 2009 · 27,702 citations
2010 update of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases · 2011 · 979 citations
References
Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review
The Medical Journal of Australia · 2006 · 883 citations
Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review
BMJ · 2003 · 2,157 citations
The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials
The Lancet · 2001 · 5,382 citations
Citation Network
How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.