Document Detail

Systematic reviews showed insufficient evidence for clinical practice in 2004: what about in 2011? The next appeal for the evidence-based medicine age.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  22747638     Owner:  NLM     Status:  Publisher    
RATIONALE AND AIM: The aims of the Cochrane systematic reviews are to make readily available and up-to-date information for clinical practice, offering consistent evidence and straightforward recommendations. In 2004, we evaluated the conclusions from Cochrane systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials in terms of their recommendations for clinical practice and found that 47.83% of them had insufficient evidence for use in clinical practice. We proposed to reanalyze the reviews to evaluate whether this percentage had significantly decreased. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Library (Issue 7, 2011) was conducted. We randomly selected reviews across all 52 Cochrane Collaborative Review Groups. RESULTS: We analyzed 1128 completed systematic reviews. Of these, 45.30% concluded that the interventions studied were likely to be beneficial, of which only 2.04% recommended no further research. In total, 45.04% of the reviews reported that the evidence did not support either benefit or harm, of which 0.8% did not recommend further studies and 44.24% recommended additional studies; the latter has decreased from our previous study with a difference of 3.59%. CONCLUSION: Only a small number of the Cochrane collaboration's systematic reviews support clinical interventions with no need for additional research. A larger number of high-quality randomized clinical trials are necessary to change the 'insufficient evidence' scenario for clinical practice illustrated by the Cochrane database. It is recommended that we should produce higher-quality primary studies in active collaboration and consultation with global scholars and societies so that this can represent a major component of methodological advance in this context.
Paulo José Fortes Villas Boas; Regina Stella Spagnuolo; Amélia Kamegasawa; Leandro Gobbo Braz; Adriana Polachini do Valle; Eliane Chaves Jorge; Hugo Hyung Bok Yoo; Antônio José Maria Cataneo; Ione Corrêa; Fernanda Bono Fukushima; Paulo do Nascimento; Norma Sueli Pinheiro Módolo; Marise Silva Teixeira; Edison Iglesias de Oliveira Vidal; Solange Ramires Daher; Regina El Dib
Related Documents :
22690368 - Reversible lithium neurotoxicity: review of the literatur.
22723468 - Cutaneous vasculopathy associated with levamisole-adulterated cocaine.
3557298 - Factitious rape: a case report.
19336778 - Frontotemporal dementia presenting as schizophrenia-like psychosis in young people: cli...
2359598 - Plunging ranula localized in the parapharyngeal space.
18524838 - Excess of mesotheliomas after exposure to chrysotile in balangero, italy.
Publication Detail:
Type:  JOURNAL ARTICLE     Date:  2012-7-3
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of evaluation in clinical practice     Volume:  -     ISSN:  1365-2753     ISO Abbreviation:  -     Publication Date:  2012 Jul 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2012-7-3     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  9609066     Medline TA:  J Eval Clin Pract     Country:  -    
Other Details:
Languages:  ENG     Pagination:  -     Citation Subset:  -    
Copyright Information:
© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Botucatu Medical School (FMB), UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista, Botucatu, São Paulo, Brazil.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Caspofungin as antifungal prophylaxis in pediatric patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem...
Next Document:  Congenital deformity of the paw in a captive tiger: case report.