School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; NevSom, Department of Rare Disorders, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway; Norwegian Centre for Mental Disorders Research (NORMENT) and KG Jebsen Centre for Neurodevelopmental Disorders, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2023 Apr;156:30-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.01.011. Epub 2023 Feb 14.
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.
We conducted a comprehensive assessment of all literature examining problems, which relate to published systematic reviews.
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.
Many hundreds of articles highlight that there are many flaws in the conduct, methods, and reporting of published systematic 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.
系统评价和荟萃分析越来越多，因为它们是为循证指南和决策提供信息的重要组成部分。临床试验的最佳实践的实施在良好临床实践的研究议程上是坚定的，但对于如何受到不良实践影响的这些研究的证据综合，可以不太清楚。我们的目的是对突出已发表系统评价中缺陷的文章进行实时系统评价，以正式记录和理解这些问题。
我们对所有检查与已发表系统评价相关问题的文献进行了全面评估。
我们的实时系统评价的第一个迭代（https://systematicreviewlution.com/）发现了 485 篇文章，记录了 67 个与系统评价的进行和报告相关的离散问题，这些问题可能会危及它们的可靠性或有效性。
尽管存在并经常应用指南，但数百篇文章强调了发表的系统评价在进行、方法和报告方面存在许多缺陷。考虑到系统评价由于具有明显透明、客观和可重复的过程，在医学决策中具有关键作用，因此未能理解和规范这些高度引用的研究设计的问题是对可信科学的威胁。
