Language:

Systematic review finds overlapping reviews were not mentioned in every other overview

Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2014-04, Vol.67 (4), p.368-375 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

Elsevier Inc. ;2014 Elsevier Inc. ;2015 INIST-CNRS ;Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ;Copyright Elsevier Limited Apr 2014 ;ISSN: 0895-4356 ;EISSN: 1878-5921 ;DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.11.007 ;PMID: 24581293

Full text available

Citations Cited by

Actions
1. Add to My Research
2. Remove from My Research
3. E-mail
4. Print
5. Permalink
6. Citation
7. EasyBib
8. EndNote
9. RefWorks
10. Delicious
11. Export RIS
12. Export BibTeX

Title:
Systematic review finds overlapping reviews were not mentioned in every other overview
Author: Pieper, Dawid ; Antoine, Sunya-Lee ; Mathes, Tim ; Neugebauer, Edmund A.M ; Eikermann, Michaela
Subjects: Abbreviations ; Analysis. Health state ; Biological and medical sciences ; Epidemiology ; Evidence-Based Medicine ; General aspects ; Humans ; Information science ; Internal Medicine ; Medical sciences ; Meta-analysis ; Methods ; Public health. Hygiene ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Research Design ; Review Literature as Topic ; Studies ; Systematic review
Is Part Of: Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2014-04, Vol.67 (4), p.368-375
Description: Abstract Objectives The objective of this study was to determine if the authors mention overlapping reviews in overviews (reviews of reviews). In addition, we aimed to calculate the actual overlap in published overviews using newly introduced, validated measures. Study Design and Settings We systematically searched for overviews from 2009 to 2011. Reviews included in the overviews were obtained. Tables (review × primary publication) were generated for each overview. The first occurrence of a primary publication is defined as the index publication. We calculated the “corrected covered area” (CCA) as a measure of overlap by dividing the frequency of repeated occurrences of the index publication in other reviews by the product of index publications and reviews, reduced by the number of index publications. Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate further differences in the overviews. Results Only 32 of 60 overviews mentioned overlaps. The median CCA was 4.0. Validation of the CCA and other overlap measures was in accordance with our predefined hypotheses. The degree of overlap tended to be higher in health technology assessment reports than in journal publications and was higher with increasing numbers of publications. Conclusions Overlaps must be reported in well-conducted overviews, and this can comprehensively be accomplished using the CCA method.
Publisher: New York, NY: Elsevier Inc
Language: English
Identifier: ISSN: 0895-4356
EISSN: 1878-5921
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.11.007
PMID: 24581293
Source: MEDLINE
ProQuest Central

Back to results list


INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY	(84-028) 37 755 057	Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM	thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn	Feedback

Systematic review finds overlapping reviews were not mentioned in every other overview

Elsevier Inc. ;2014 Elsevier Inc. ;2015 INIST-CNRS ;Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ;Copyright Elsevier Limited Apr 2014 ;ISSN: 0895-4356 ;EISSN: 1878-5921 ;DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.11.007 ;PMID: 24581293

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait