4.6 Review

The problems with systematic reviews: a living systematic review

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 156, Issue -, Pages 30-41

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.01.011

Keywords

Systematic review; Meta-analysis; Research integrity; Bias; Reproducibility; Evidence syntheses; Influence

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We conducted a comprehensive assessment of published systematic reviews and identified 67 discrete problems that can potentially undermine their reliability or validity. These issues include flaws in conduct, methods, and reporting, despite the existence of guidelines.
Objectives: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are proliferating as they are an important building block to inform evidence-based guidelines and decision-making. Enforcement of best practice in clinical trials is firmly on the research agenda of good clinical practice, but there is less clarity as to how evidence syntheses that combine these studies can be influenced by bad practice. Our aim was to conduct a living systematic review of articles that highlight flaws in published systematic reviews to formally document and understand these problems.Study Design and Setting: We conducted a comprehensive assessment of all literature examining problems, which relate to published systematic reviews.Results: The first iteration of our living systematic review (https://systematicreviewlution.com/) has found 485 articles documenting 67 discrete problems relating to the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews which can potentially jeopardize their reliability or validity.Conclusion: Many hundreds of articles highlight that there are many flaws in the conduct, methods, and reporting of published sys-tematic reviews, despite the existence and frequent application of guidelines. Considering the pivotal role that systematic reviews have in medical decision-making due to having apparently transparent, objective, and replicable processes, a failure to appreciate and regulate problems with these highly cited research designs is a threat to credible science. (c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available