Many Reviews Are Systematic but Some Are More Transparent and Completely Reported than Others

Open Access

27 March 2007

journal article
Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLoS Medicine

Vol. 4 (3), e147
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040147

Abstract

The implications for PLoS Medicine and other journals of new research, published in this issue, showing that there are major variations in the reporting quality of systematic reviews.

Keywords

SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
META-ANALYSIS
CLINICAL TRIAL REPORTING
MEDICINE AND HEALTH SCIENCES
RESEARCH REPORTING GUIDELINES
DECISION MAKING
EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE
SCIENCE POLICY

This publication has 2 references indexed in Scilit:

Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic Reviews
PLoS Medicine, 2007
Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement
The Lancet, 1999

Cited by 31 articles