High quality of the evidence for medical and other health-related interventions was uncommon in Cochrane systematic reviews

Padhraig S. Fleming; Despina Koletsi; John P A Ioannidis; Nikolaos Pandis

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.03.012

Back

Discussion(0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment.

Related publications

Article2020

The quality of evidence for medical interventions does not improve or worsen: a metaepidemiological study of Cochrane reviews

Jeremy Howick, Despina Koletsi, Nikolaos Pandis, Padhraig S. Fleming, Martin Loef, Harald Walach, Stefan Schmidt, John P A Ioannidis

Article2022

Most healthcare interventions tested in Cochrane Reviews are not effective according to high quality evidence: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Claire Madigan, Nikolaos Pandis, Martin Loef, Harald Walach, Sebastian Sauer, Jos Kleijnen, Jadbinder Seehra, Tess Johnson, Stefan Schmidt, Jeremy Howick, Despina Koletsi, John P A Ioannidis

Article2022

Most Healthcare Interventions Tested in Cochrane Reviews are Not Effective According to High Quality Evidence: A Meta-Epidemiological Study

Jeremy Howick, Despina Koletsi, John P A Ioannidis, Claire Madigan, Nikolaos Pandis, Martin Loef, Harald Walach, Sebastian Sauer, Jos Kleijnen, Jadbinder Seehra, Tess Johnson, Stefan Schmidt

Article2013

The evolution of assessing bias in Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions: celebrating methodological contributions of the Cochrane Collaboration

Lucy Turner, Isabelle Boutron, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Douglas G. Altman, David Moher

Article2002

A Comparison of the Quality of Cochrane Reviews and Systematic Reviews Published in Paper-Based Journals

Beverley Shea, David Moher, Ian D. Graham, Ba’ Pham, Peter Tugwell