| Ref ID | 529 |
| First Author | K. C. Siontis |
| Journal | CIRCULATION. CARDIOVASCULAR QUALITY & OUTCOMES |
| Year Of Publishing | 2018 |
| URL | https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.005212?download=true |
| Keywords |
• General medical • Protocols • Overlapping reviews/redundancy |
| Problem(s) |
• Redundant / overlapping / duplicated review question; leads to research waste |
| Article Type | Editorial |
| Article Subtype | Discussion piece |
| First Author Country | United States |
| Aim | A discussion highlighting problems of overlapping and redundant systematic reviews and meta-analyses, many of which are not registered, which leads to duplicated efforts and research waste. The authors speculate that this may be more common in certain disease areas such as when the condition of interest, is common in the general population; where numerous teams of investigators and clinicians of various specialise in this field worldwide; and where many articles get published. The authors highlight that the number of evidence syntheses far exceeds the number of primary studies in this field and provide example areas. |
| Level of Investigation | Descriptive |
| Summary of Findings | The discussion highlights particular areas where duplication appears pervasive such as: atrial fibrillation where there were eleven overlapping or identical meta-analyses on statin use for cardiac surgery and the authors highlight that the number of MAs in this topic has more than doubled since then, without any new meta-analysis offering something really useful. Additionally in rheumatoid arthritis, 28 network meta-analyses for biological agents were published between 2003 and 2014. |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 1 |
| Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed | 1 |
| Treatment impacted | No |
| Treatment impacted description | |
| Interpretation impacted | Not Applicable |
| Interpretation impacted description |