Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation

被引:161
|
作者
Jadad, AR [1 ]
Moher, M
Browman, GP
Booker, L
Sigouin, C
Fuentes, M
Stevens, R
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[2] Univ Oxford, Inst Hlth Sci, Oxford OX3 7LF, England
[3] Foresight Consultants, Dundas, ON L9H 2R5, Canada
来源
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL | 2000年 / 320卷 / 7234期
关键词
D O I
10.1136/bmj.320.7234.537
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective To evaluate the clinical, methodological, and reporting aspects of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the treatment of asthma and to compare those published by the Cochrane Collaboration with those published in paper based journals. Design. Analysis of studies identified from Medline, CINAHL. HealthSTAR, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, personal collections, and reference lists. Studies Articles describing a systematic review or a meta-analysis of the treatment of asthma that were published as a full report, in any language or format, in a peer reviewed journal or the Cochrane Library. Main outcome measures General characteristics of studies reviewed and methodological characteristics (sources of articles; language restrictions; format, design and publication status of studies included; type of data synthesis; and methodological quality). Results 50 systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included. More than half were published in the past two years. Twelve reviews were published in the Cochrane Library and 38 were published in 2 peer reviewed journals. Forced expiratory volume in one second was the most frequently used outcome, but few reviews evaluated the effect of treatment on costs or patient preferences. Forty reviews were judged to have serious or extensive nd rvs. All six reviews associated with industry were in this group. Seven of the 10 most rigorous reviews were published in the Cochrane Library. Conclusions Most reviews published in peer reviewed journals or funded by industry have serious methodological flaws that limit their value to guide decisions. Cochrane reviews are more rigorous and better reported than those published in peer reviewed journals.
引用
收藏
页码:537 / 540D
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation (vol 320, pg 537, 2000)
    Jadad, AR
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7240): : 984 - 984
  • [2] Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation (vol 321, page 527, 2000)
    Jadad
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 321 (7256): : 275 - 275
  • [3] Evaluation of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
    Dziadkowiec, Oliwier
    JOGNN-JOURNAL OF OBSTETRIC GYNECOLOGIC AND NEONATAL NURSING, 2024, 53 (05):
  • [4] Critical appraisal of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
    Soni, Kapil D.
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, 2025, 69 (01) : 161 - 164
  • [5] Critical appraisal of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
    Deichsel, Adrian
    Laky, Brenda
    Ackermann, Jakob
    Muench, Lukas N.
    Mathis, Dominic T.
    Eggeling, Lena
    Merkely, Gergo
    Wafaisade, Arasch
    Kittl, Christoph
    Schuettler, Karl F.
    Guenther, Daniel
    Res Komitee Arbeitsgemeinschaft Arthroskopie AGA
    ARTHROSKOPIE, 2025,
  • [6] Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews
    Hensinger, Robert N.
    Thompson, George H.
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC ORTHOPAEDICS, 2013, 33 (01) : 1 - 1
  • [7] Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
    Uman, Lindsay S.
    JOURNAL OF THE CANADIAN ACADEMY OF CHILD AND ADOLESCENT PSYCHIATRY, 2011, 20 (01) : 57 - 59
  • [8] Systematic reviews and meta-analyses
    Smith, C. J.
    PHLEBOLOGY, 2011, 26 (06) : 271 - 273
  • [9] Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
    Anderson, Wendy G.
    McNamara, Megan C.
    Arnold, Robert M.
    JOURNAL OF PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2009, 12 (10) : 937 - 946
  • [10] Systematic reviews and meta-analyses
    Menzies, D.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TUBERCULOSIS AND LUNG DISEASE, 2011, 15 (05) : 582 - 593