Investing in updating: how do conclusions change when Cochrane systematic reviews are updated?

Ref ID 433
First Author S. D. French
Journal BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Year Of Publishing 2005
URL https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-5-33
Keywords • Cochrane
• General medical
• Currency
Problem(s) • Not updated regularly
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country Australia
Aim To assess the effect of updating Cochrane systematic reviews over a four year period (1998-2002) on conclusions of the reviews.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings 70% of included reviews had been updated. Of these updated reviews 9% had a change in conclusion. Both an increase in precision and a change in statistical significance of the primary outcome were predictive of a change in conclusion of the review.
Number of systematic reviews included 362
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 377
Treatment impacted Yes
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Yes
Interpretation impacted description Updating all reviews as frequently as every two years may not be necessary, however some reviews may need to be updated more often than every two years.