- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Errors in study inclusion or omission of relevant studies
- Accounting for single center effects in systematic reviews cannot be overlooked
Ref ID | 669 |
First Author | B.A.M.P. Besen |
Journal | CRITICAL CARE |
Year Of Publishing | 2017 |
URL | http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1804-0 |
Keywords |
Error Nephrology |
Problem(s) |
Perpetuates citation of poor quality primary study data Errors in study inclusion or omission of relevant studies |
Number of systematic reviews included | 1 |
Summary of Findings | The authors of the editorial re-conducted the meta-analysis from the systematic review but also included multi-centre RCTs (which had been excluded by the review in question) and in contrast to the systematic review authors, found no significant treatment effect from renal replacement therapy. |
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 |