author={Joseph A. Ezzo and Barker Bausell and Daniel E. Moerman and Brian M. Berman and Victoria Hadhazy},
  journal={International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care},
  pages={457 - 466}
  • J. Ezzo, B. Bausell, V. Hadhazy
  • Published 1 October 2001
  • Medicine, Psychology
  • International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Objectives: The objectives of this paper were: a) to determine what can be learned from conclusions of systematic reviews about the evidence base of medicine; and b) to determine whether two readers draw similar conclusions from the same review, and whether these match the authors' conclusions. Methods: Three methodologists (two per review) rated 160 Cochrane systematic reviews (issue 1, 1998) using pre-established conclusion categories. Disagreements were resolved by discussion to arrive at a… 

The Value of “Traditional” Reviews in the Era of Systematic Reviewing

  • M. Dijkers
  • Medicine
    American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation
  • 2009
It is argued here that reviews play a number of roles in scientific research and professional practice such as answering specific clinical questions, pooling data, comparing research, synthesizing complementary studies, offering guidance in uncharted fields, and “translating” research between disciplinary traditions.

A Quantitative Study of Bias in Systematic Reviews

Unreliable lack of trial inclusion, unreliable methodological assessments, erroneous interpretation of trial data and unreliable dichotomization of equivocal trial data were identified as sources of bias.

Mapping the Cochrane evidence for decision making in health care.

The Cochrane Collaboration needs to include clinical trial protocol summaries with a study design optimized to answer the relevant research questions in terms of their recommendations for clinical practice and research.

Mapping of the evidence from systematic reviews of the Cochrane Collaboration for decision-making within physiotherapy.

Only one systematic review ("Pulmonary rehabilitation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease") indicated that the intervention tested could be used with certainty that it would be effective, and most of the systematic reviews recommended further studies with greater rigor of methodological quality.

Barriers to the uptake of eye care services in developing countries: A systematic review of interventions

The review suggests that eye health education and service provision lessen the barriers to service uptake and increase the uptake of eye care services.

Assessment of adverse effects and applicability--two areas not (yet) covered adequately in Cochrane reports.

  • G. Gartlehner
  • Medicine
    Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen
  • 2008



Agreement among reviewers of review articles.

Quality of Cochrane reviews

It is suggested that users of any systematic review should assess its reliability and that for a critical assessment of the quality of non-Cochrane reviews users should first look at the database of abstracts of reviews of effectiveness.

Meta-analyses to evaluate analgesic interventions: a systematic qualitative review of their methodology.

Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals.

Cochrane reviews appear to have greater methodological rigor and are more frequently updated than systematic reviews or meta-analyses published in paper-based journals.

Factors influencing publication of research results. Follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards.

There was evidence of publication bias in that for both institutional review boards there was an association between results reported to be significant and publication and contrary to popular opinion, publication bias originates primarily with investigators, not journal editors.

Evidence-based medicine.

  • K. H. Lee
  • Medicine
    Singapore medical journal
  • 1997
Evidence based-medicine has developed as a tool whose purpose is to help physicians keep up to date, expand their knowledge, and improve clinical practice and studies suggest that practicing EBM might prevent the unnecessary expense of potentially inadequate prescriptions, promote critical thinking, identify and stimulate good practices, and eliminate those that are ineffective or harmful.


The ethics of ignorance.

  • R. Smith
  • Medicine
    Journal of medical ethics
  • 1992
The scientific base of medicine is weak and it would be better for everybody if that fact were more widely recognised.

Meta-analysis: science or religion?