Conducting separate reviews of benefits and harms could improve systematic reviews and meta-analyses
Abstract Guidance for systematic reviews of interventions recommends both benefits and harms be included. Systematic reviews may reach conclusions about harms (or lack of harms) that are not true when reviews include only some relevant studies, rely on incomplete data from eligible studies, use inap...
Main Authors: | Evan Mayo-Wilson, Riaz Qureshi, Tianjing Li |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2023-04-01
|
Series: | Systematic Reviews |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02234-0 |
Similar Items
-
Could early life DHA supplementation benefit neurodevelopment? A systematic review and meta-analysis
by: Ruolan Hu, et al.
Published: (2024-04-01) -
Benefits and harms of screening for hepatocellular carcinoma in high-risk populations: systematic review and meta-analysis
by: Jichun Yang, et al.
Published: (2023-09-01) -
Benefits and harms of oral anticoagulant therapy in chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
by: Jha, V
Published: (2019) -
E-cycling and health benefits: A systematic literature review with meta-analyses
by: Amund Riiser, et al.
Published: (2022-10-01) -
Citation Discovery Tools for Conducting Adaptive Meta-analyses to Update Systematic Reviews
by: Jong-Myon Bae, et al.
Published: (2016-03-01)