Quality of Cochrane reviews: assessment of sample from 1998

Ref ID 455
First Author O. Olsen
Journal BMJ
Year Of Publishing 2001
URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC57800/pdf/829.pdf
Keywords Cochrane
General medical
Problem(s) Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews
Following guidelines is no guarantee of a rigorous systematic review
Spin or subjective interpretation of findings
Number of systematic reviews included 52
Summary of Findings 29% of Cochrane reviews first published in 1998 were judged to have major problems. There were three areas of concern. Firstly, the evidence did not support the conclusions in 17% reviews. Secondly, the conduct or reporting of the reviews was unsatisfactory in 23% reviews. Thirdly, there were stylistic concerns with 23% reviews. The problematic conclusions all described the effect of the experimental treatment in terms that we judged to have been too optimistic (table 3). None of these nine reviews indicated a bias towards the control treatment.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? Yes
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? No