TITLE

Registering systematic reviews

AUTHOR(S)
Straus, Sharon; Moher, David
PUB. DATE
January 2010
SOURCE
CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal;1/12/2010, Vol. 182 Issue 1, p13
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Opinion
ABSTRACT
In this article, the author discusses the registering of systematic reviews. He feels that registering systematic reviews should be part of clinical trial registry. He believes that a registry of reviews will help decisionmakers and researchers in easy determination of reviews which are in development by other groups. It is stated that registry of systematic reviews should reduce publication bias, enhance transparency and avoid duplication of effort.
ACCESSION #
47771043

 

Related Articles

  • Clinical trials registries are underused in the pregnancy and childbirth literature: a systematic review of the top 20 journals. Yerokhin, Vadim V.; Carr, Branden K.; Sneed, Guy; Vassar, Matt // BMC Research Notes;10/21/2016, Vol. 9, p1 

    Background: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses that do not include unpublished data in their analyses may be prone to publication bias, which in some cases has been shown to have deleterious consequences on determining the efficacy of interventions. Methods: We retrieved systematic reviews and...

  • Outcome reporting bias in evaluations of public health interventions: evidence of impact and the potential role of a study register. Pearson, Mark; Peters, Jaime // Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health;Apr2012, Vol. 66 Issue 4, p286 

    Background Systematic reviews of the effectiveness of interventions are increasingly used to informrecommendations for public health policy and practice, but outcome reporting bias is rarely assessed.Methods Studies excluded at full-text stage screening for a systematic review of a public health...

  • Establishing a Minimum Dataset for Prospective Registration of Systematic Reviews: An International Consultation. Booth, Alison; Clarke, Mike; Ghersi, Davina; Moher, David; Petticrew, Mark; Stewart, Lesley // PLoS Clinical Trials;Nov2011, Vol. 8 Issue 11, Special section p1 

    Background: In response to growing recognition of the value of prospective registration of systematic review protocols, we planned to develop a web-based open access international register. In order for the register to fulfil its aims of reducing unplanned duplication, reducing publication bias,...

  • The influence of study characteristics on reporting of subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: systematic review. Guyatt, G. H. // BMJ: British Medical Journal (International Edition);4/2/2011, Vol. 342 Issue 7800, p748 

    The article focuses on the study characteristics which affect the reporting of subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials. It says that various study characteristics including non-surgical interventions, high impact journals' publication, and trials with industry funding are more likely...

  • Observer bias in randomised clinical trials with binary outcomes: systematic review of trials with both blinded and non-blinded outcome assessors. Hr¢bjartsson, Asbjrn; Skou Thomsen, Ann Sofia; Emanuelsson, Frida; Tendal, Britta; Hilden, Jrgen; Boutron, Isabelle; Ravaud, Philippe; Brorson, Stig // BMJ: British Medical Journal (Overseas & Retired Doctors Edition;3/17/2012, Vol. 344 Issue 7848, p20 

    The article presents a study on the impacts of non-blinded outcome assessments on the predicted intervention effects of randomised clinical trials. The study used clinical trials from different sources such as PubMed, Embase and CINAHL, in which clinical trials with binary outcomes were...

  • Improving Current Practice in Reviews of the Built Environment and Physical Activity. Gebel, Klaus; Ding, Ding; Foster, Charlie; Bauman, Adrian; Sallis, James // Sports Medicine;Mar2015, Vol. 45 Issue 3, p297 

    Over the last decade, there has been a marked increase in studies about built environments and physical activity. As the number of publications is growing rapidly, literature reviews play an important role in identifying primary studies and in synthesizing their findings. However, many of the...

  • Revisiting the Cochrane Collaboration. Clarke, Mike; Langhorne, Peter // BMJ: British Medical Journal (International Edition);10/13/2001, Vol. 323 Issue 7317, p821 

    Editorial. Focuses on the Cochrane Collaboration, a center in Great Britain which strives to prepare and keep up to date systematic reviews of the effects of healthcare interventions. Efforts to develop a system to identify relevant randomised trials; Challenge of identifying and incorporating...

  • Methylphenidate for ADHD.  // BMJ: British Medical Journal;11/28/2015, Vol. 351 Issue 8035, ph5203 

    The article explains the role of methylphenidate in boosting risk of non-serious adverse events in association with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder among children and teenagers, based on a study involving records of parallel and crossover randomised clinical trials in February 2015.

  • Doctors discuss why medical practice deviates from evidence. Hawkes, Nigel // BMJ: British Medical Journal (Overseas & Retired Doctors Edition;11/13/2010, Vol. 341 Issue 7781, p1014 

    The article relates the consensus among panelists at Evidence 2010, an international conference at BMA House, that medical evidence, backed by double blind trials and systematic reviews, are often ignored by physicians in Great Britain.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics