Pitfalls in systematic reviews

Cynthia Farquhar, Andy Vail

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The term 'evidence-based medicine' means integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research. An important source for those who wish to practise evidence-based medicine is the systematic review. Systematic reviews, however, are not without their pitfalls. This review will consider the problems and challenges for researchers and users of systematic reviews. RECENT FINDINGS: Failure to adequately assess study quality, funding bias, publication bias, reliance on outcomes that provide no help in clinical decision-making, analysis errors and the incorrect use of evidence statements are all common pitfalls in systematic reviews. SUMMARY: There are several steps in completing a systematic review. These include developing the clinical question, searching for all available literature, study selection, assessment of study quality, data extraction, data analysis, interpreting the results, implications for practice and further research, and finally updating the review in a timely manner. Authors of systematic reviews need to be aware of these problems and attempt to address them so that research evidence may be of clinical value to both providers and consumers of healthcare. © 2006 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)433-439
    Number of pages6
    JournalCurrent Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology
    Volume18
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Aug 2006

    Keywords

    • Evidenced-based medicine
    • Systematic reviews

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Pitfalls in systematic reviews'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this