- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Data extraction errors and double counting
- Different patterns of duplicate publication: an analysis of articles used in systematic reviews
| Ref ID | 517 |
| First Author | E. von Elm |
| Journal | JAMA |
| Year Of Publishing | 2004 |
| URL | https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/198260/joc31171.pdf |
| Keywords |
Transparency Pain Error |
| Problem(s) |
Data extraction errors and double counting |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 141 |
| Summary of Findings | Authors of 40% of 141 systematic reviews acknowledged identification of duplicates. Data from 60 articles were published twice, data from 13 articles were published three times, data from 3 article were published four times, and data from 2 articles were published five times. 63% of the duplicates had no cross-reference at all, indicating a high level of covert duplication. |
| 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 |