Errors in the conduct of systematic reviews of pharmacological interventions for irritable bowel syndrome

Ref ID	635
First Author	A. C. Ford
Journal	AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
Year Of Publishing	2010
URL	https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19920807/
Keywords	• Pharmacological • Missing data • Error • Cochrane
Problem(s)	• Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews • Errors in study inclusion or omission of relevant studies • Data extraction errors and double counting
Number of systematic reviews included	8
Summary of Findings	In fi ve of the eight meta-analyses 13 – 29 % of included trials were ineligible according to investigators ’ criteria, constituting 8 – 26 % of included patients. Six of the meta-analyses missed 17 separate published eligible trials; 3 – 11 % of eligible patients were, as a result, not included. All eight meta-analyses contained errors in dichotomous data extraction, in 29 – 100 % of truly eligible trials, leading to errors in 15 of 16 reported pooled treatment effects.
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?	Yes