Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Guides for Reading and Interpreting Systematic Reviews

Guides for Reading and Interpreting Systematic Reviews SPECIAL CONTRIBUTION Guides for Reading and Interpreting Systematic Reviews II. How Did the Authors Find the Studies and Assess Their Quality? Alejandro R. Jadad, MD, DPhil; David Moher, MSc; Terry P. Klassen, MD, MSc ne of the most powerful arguments used by the supporters of systematic reviews is that they overcome most of the limitations of narrative reviews by being the product of a scientific process to reduce bias and imprecision and by providing detailed in- 1,2 O formation to allow replication by others. Two of the most effective mechanisms for a systematic review to reduce bias and imprecision are including the maximum possible num- ber of relevant individual trials and providing a detailed description of their strengths and limita- tions. We have structured this article to serve 2 purposes. First, we describe the characteristics of the ideal search, the limitations and decisions that most reviewers face when deciding how to search the literature, and the aspects of a report that readers should evaluate to assess the comprehen- siveness and appropriateness of the search strategy. Second, we describe the limitations and deci- sions that most reviewers face when deciding how to assess trial quality and the aspects of a http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA Pediatrics American Medical Association

Guides for Reading and Interpreting Systematic Reviews

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/guides-for-reading-and-interpreting-systematic-reviews-860qWYTSF1
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 1998 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.
ISSN
2168-6203
eISSN
2168-6211
DOI
10.1001/archpedi.152.8.812
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

SPECIAL CONTRIBUTION Guides for Reading and Interpreting Systematic Reviews II. How Did the Authors Find the Studies and Assess Their Quality? Alejandro R. Jadad, MD, DPhil; David Moher, MSc; Terry P. Klassen, MD, MSc ne of the most powerful arguments used by the supporters of systematic reviews is that they overcome most of the limitations of narrative reviews by being the product of a scientific process to reduce bias and imprecision and by providing detailed in- 1,2 O formation to allow replication by others. Two of the most effective mechanisms for a systematic review to reduce bias and imprecision are including the maximum possible num- ber of relevant individual trials and providing a detailed description of their strengths and limita- tions. We have structured this article to serve 2 purposes. First, we describe the characteristics of the ideal search, the limitations and decisions that most reviewers face when deciding how to search the literature, and the aspects of a report that readers should evaluate to assess the comprehen- siveness and appropriateness of the search strategy. Second, we describe the limitations and deci- sions that most reviewers face when deciding how to assess trial quality and the aspects of a

Journal

JAMA PediatricsAmerican Medical Association

Published: Aug 1, 1998

There are no references for this article.