- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Reliance on randomised controlled trials for harms / safety data
- Poor reporting and inadequate searches were apparent in systematic reviews of adverse effects
Ref ID | 375 |
First Author | S. Golder |
Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2008 |
URL | https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(07)00217-X/fulltext |
Keywords |
Harms Reproducibility General medical Searching |
Problem(s) |
Insufficient literature searches Reliance on randomised controlled trials for harms / safety data Methods not described to enable replication |
Number of systematic reviews included | 277 |
Summary of Findings | Less than 5% of the included systematic reviews of adverse effects reported enough detail for the searches to be reproducible. The majority of reviews did not indicate whether they used any language restrictions. Many of the reported literature searches relied solely on indexing or text-word searches, with little use of synonyms and truncation. Few reviews (14%) attempted to source information from pharmaceutical companies. The majority of reviews did not search more than one or two databases, and few other methods of identifying information were used. |
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Not Applicable |
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |