- Framework of problems /
- Redundant / overlapping / duplicated review question; leads to research waste
- Overlapping systematic reviews of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction comparing hamstring autograft with bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft: why are they different?
| Ref ID | 652 |
| First Author | R. W. Poolman |
| Journal | JBJS |
| Year Of Publishing | 2007 |
| URL | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17606794/ |
| Keywords |
• Surgery • Spin • Overlapping reviews/redundancy |
| Problem(s) |
• Spin or subjective interpretation of findings • Redundant / overlapping / duplicated review question; leads to research waste |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 11 |
| Summary of Findings | New “overlapping” systematic reviews were conducted without citation of previously published reviews on the same topic and the methodological quality of the reviews (QUOROM) was variable |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | No |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | Yes |