- Framework of problems / Comprehensive
- Perpetuates citation of poor quality primary study data
- Retracted randomized controlled trials were cited and not corrected in systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines
Ref ID | 879 |
First Author | Y. Kataoka |
Journal | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY |
Year Of Publishing | 2022 |
URL | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435622001664?via%3Dihub |
Keywords |
Retraction General medical Non-Cochrane reviews |
Problem(s) |
Perpetuates citation of poor quality primary study data |
Number of systematic reviews included | 525 |
Summary of Findings | From 525 included systematic reviews from the Retraction Watch Database searched on July 27 2021. Among a larger sample of 587 included systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines, 252 (43%) were published after retraction, and 335 (57%) were published before retraction. Among 127 systematic reviews published citing already retracted RCTs in their evidence synthesis, none corrected themselves after publication. Of 335 articles published before retraction, 239 included RCTs that were later retracted in their evidence synthesis. Among them, only 5% of Systematic Reviews (9/196) and 5% of Clinical Practice Guidelines (2/43) corrected or retracted their results. |
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? | Yes |