Home Articoli
PRISMA Statement per il reporting di revisioni sistematiche e meta-analisi degli studi che valutano gli interventi sanitari: spiegazione ed elaborazione

Guidelines & Standards

PRISMA Statement per il reporting di revisioni sistematiche e meta-analisi degli studi che valutano gli interventi sanitari: spiegazione ed elaborazione
Alessandro Liberati, Douglas G. Altman, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Cynthia Mulrow, Peter C. Gøtzsche, John P.A. Ioannidis, Mike Clarke, P.J. Devereaux, Jos Kleijnen, David Moher

Evidence 2015;7(6): e1000115 doi: 10.4470/E1000115

Pubblicato: 27 giugno 2015

Copyright: © 2009 Liberati et al. Questo è un articolo open-access, distribuito con licenza Creative Commons Attribution, che ne consente l’utilizzo, la distribuzione e la riproduzione su qualsiasi supporto esclusivamente per fini non commerciali, a condizione di riportare sempre autore e citazione originale.

Vedi anche: Linee guida per il reporting di revisioni sistematiche e meta-analisi: il PRISMA Statement

1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Randomized controlled trials registration/application checklist. December 2006.
2. Young C, Horton R. Putting clinical trials into context. Lancet. 2005;366:107-8.
3. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e78.
4. Dixon E, Hameed M, Sutherland F, Cook DJ, Doig C. Evaluating metaanalyses in the general surgical literature: a critical appraisal. Ann Surg. 2005;241:450-9.
5. Hemels ME, Vicente C, Sadri H, Masson MJ, Einarson TR. Quality assessment of meta-analyses of RCTs of pharmacotherapy in major depressive disorder. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20:477-84.
6. Wen J, Ren Y, Wang L, Li Y, Liu Y, Zhou M, et al. The reporting quality of meta-analyses improves: a random sampling study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:770-5.
7. Moher D, Simera I, Schulz KF, Hoey J, Altman DG. Helping editors, peer reviewers and authors improve the clarity, completeness and transparency of reporting health research [Editorial]. BMC Med. 2008;6:13.
8. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet. 1999;354:1896-900.
9. Green S, Higgins JPT, Alderson P, Clarke M, Mulrow CD, Oxman AD. Chapter 1: What is a systematic review? In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Disponibile a: www.cochrane-handbook.org. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
10. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al; GRADE Working Group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:924-6.
11. Higgins JPT, Altman DG. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.0.0. The Cochrane Collaboration; updated February 2008. Disponibile a: www.cochrane-handbook.org. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
12. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; the PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:264-9.
13. Atkins D, Fink K, Slutsky J; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Better information for better health care: the Evidence-based Practice Center program and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142:1035-41.
14. Helfand M, Balshem H. Principles for developing guidance: AHRQ and the effective health-care program. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:484-90.
15. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Disponibile a: www.cochrane-handbook.org. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
16. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD’s Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care. York, UK: University of York; 2009. Disponibile a: www.york.ac.uk/media/crd/Systematic_Reviews.pdf. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
17. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, et al; CONSORT GROUP (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials). The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:663-94.
18. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, et al; Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:W1-12.
19. Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Mulrow CD, Pocock SJ, et al; STROBE Initiative. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:W163-94.
20. Barker A, Maratos EC, Edmonds L, Lim E. Recurrence rates of videoassisted thoracoscopic versus open surgery in the prevention of recurrent pneumothoraces: a systematic review of randomised and non-randomised trials. Lancet. 2007;370:329-35.
21. Bjelakovic G, Nikolova D, Gluud LL, Simonetti RG, Gluud C. Mortality in randomized trials of antioxidant supplements for primary and secondary prevention: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2007;297:842-57.
22. Montori VM, Wilczynski NL, Morgan D, Haynes RB; Hedges Team. Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ. 2005;330:68.
23. Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Willett WC, Wong JB, Giovannucci E, Dietrich T, Dawson-Hughes B. Fracture prevention with vitamin D supplementation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 2005;293:2257-64.
24. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, et al; CONSORT Group. CONSORT for reporting randomised trials in journal and conference abstracts. Lancet. 2008;371:281-3.
25. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, et al; CONSORT Group. CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2008;5:e20.
26. Haynes RB, Mulrow CD, Huth EJ, Altman DG, Gardner MJ. More informative abstracts revisited. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113:69-76.
27. Mulrow CD, Thacker SB, Pugh JA. A proposal for more informative abstracts of review articles. Ann Intern Med. 1988;108:613-5.
28. Froom P, Froom J. Deficiencies in structured medical abstracts. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46:591-4.
29. Hartley J. Clarifying the abstracts of systematic literature reviews. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 2000;88:332-7.
30. Hartley J, Sydes M, Blurton A. Obtaining information accurately and quickly: are structured abstract more efficient? Journal of Information Science. 1996;22:349-56.
31. Pocock SJ, Hughes MD, Lee RJ. Statistical problems in the reporting of clinical trials. A survey of three medical journals. N Engl J Med. 1987;317:426-32.
32. Taddio A, Pain T, Fassos FF, Boon H, Ilersich AL, Einarson TR. Quality of nonstructured and structured abstracts of original research articles in the British Medical Journal, the Canadian Medical Association Journal and the Journal of the American Medical Association. CMAJ. 1994;150:1611-5.
33. Harris KC, Kuramoto LK, Schulzer M, Retallack JE. Effect of school-based physical activity interventions on body mass index in children: a meta-analysis. CMAJ. 2009;180:719-26.
34. James MT, Conley J, Tonelli M, Manns BJ, MacRae J, Hemmelgarn BR; Alberta Kidney Disease Network. Meta-analysis: antibiotics for prophylaxis against hemodialysis catheter-related infections. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:596-605.
35. Counsell C. Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:380-7.
36. Gotzsche PC. Why we need a broad perspective on meta-analysis. It may be crucially important for patients [Editorial]. BMJ. 2000;321:585-6.
37. Grossman P, Niemann L, Schmidt S, Walach H. Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits. A meta-analysis. J Psychosom Res. 2004;57:35-43.
38. Brunton G, Green S, Higgins JPT, Kjeldstrøm M, Jackson N, Oliver JS. Chapter 2: Preparing a Cochrane review. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Disponibile a: Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
39. Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song F. Systematic reviews of trials and other studies. Health Technol Assess. 1998;2:1-276.
40. Ioannidis JP, Rosenberg PS, Goedert JJ, O’Brien TR; International Metaanalysis of HIV Host Genetics. Commentary: meta-analysis of individual participants’ data in genetic epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156:204-10.
41. Stewart LA, Clarke MJ. Practical methodology of meta-analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data. Cochrane Working Group. Stat Med. 1995;14:2057-79.
42. Chan AW, Hro´bjartsson A, Haahr MT, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA. 2004;291:2457-65.
43. Dwan K, Altman DG, Arnaiz JA, Bloom J, Chan AW, Cronin E, et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS ONE. 2008;3:e3081.
44. Silagy CA, Middleton P, Hopewell S. Publishing protocols of systematic reviews: comparing what was done to what was planned. JAMA. 2002;287:2831-4.
45. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination research projects. York, UK: University of York; 2009. Disponibile a: www.crd.york.ac.uk/crdweb. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
46. The Joanna Briggs Institute protocols & work in progress. 2009. Disponibile a: http://joannabriggs.org. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
47. Bagshaw SM, McAlister FA, Manns BJ, Ghali WA. Acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy: a case study of the pitfalls in the evolution of evidence. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:161-6.
48. Biondi-Zoccai GG, Lotrionte M, Abbate A, Testa L, Remigi E, Burzotta F, et al. Compliance with QUOROM and quality of reporting of overlapping meta-analyses on the role of acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast associated nephropathy: case study. BMJ. 2006;332:202-9.
49. Sacks HS, Berrier J, Reitman D, Ancona-Berk VA, Chalmers TC. Metaanalyses of randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 1987;316:450-5.
50. Schroth RJ, Hitchon CA, Uhanova J, Noreddin A, Taback SP, Moffatt ME, et al. Hepatitis B vaccination for patients with chronic renal failure. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004:CD003775.
51. Egger M, Zellweger-Za¨hner T, Schneider M, Junker C, Lengeler C, Antes G. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German.Lancet. 1997;350:326-9.
52. Gre´goire G, Derderian F, Le Lorier J. Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis: is there a Tower of Babel bias? J Clin Epidemiol.1995;48:159-63.
53. Ju¨ni P, Holenstein F, Sterne J, Bartlett C, Egger M. Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: empirical study. Int J Epidemiol.2002;31:115-23.
54. Moher D, Pham B, Klassen TP, Schulz KF, Berlin JA, Jadad AR, et al. What contributions do languages other than English make on the results of meta-analyses? J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:964-72.
55. Pan Z, Trikalinos TA, Kavvoura FK, Lau J, Ioannidis JP. Local literature bias in genetic epidemiology: an empirical evaluation of the Chinese literature. PLoS Med. 2005;2:e334.
56. Hopewell S, McDonald S, Clarke M, Egger M. Grey literature in metaanalyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007:MR000010.
57. Melander H, Ahlqvist-Rastad J, Meijer G, Beermann B. Evidence b(i)ased medicine—selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications. BMJ. 2003;326:1171-3.
58. Sutton AJ, Duval SJ, Tweedie RL, Abrams KR, Jones DR. Empirical assessment of effect of publication bias on meta-analyses. BMJ. 2000;320:1574-7.
59. Gøtzsche PC. Believability of relative risks and odds ratios in abstracts: cross sectional study. BMJ. 2006;333:231-4.
60. Bhandari M, Devereaux PJ, Guyatt GH, Cook DJ, Swiontkowski MF, Sprague S, et al. An observational study of orthopaedic abstracts and subsequent full-text publications. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A:615-21.
61. Rosmarakis ES, Soteriades ES, Vergidis PI, Kasiakou SK, Falagas ME. From conference abstract to full paper: differences between data presented in conferences and journals. FASEB J. 2005;19:673-80.
62. Toma M, McAlister FA, Bialy L, Adams D, Vandermeer B, Armstrong PW. Transition from meeting abstract to full-length journal article for randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 2006;295:1281-7.
63. Saunders Y, Ross JR, Broadley KE, Edmonds PM, Patel S; Steering Group. Systematic review of bisphosphonates for hypercalcaemia of malignancy. Palliat Med. 2004;18:418-31.
64. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:224-33.
65. Bergerhoff K, Ebrahim S, Paletta G. Do we need to consider ‘in process citations’ for search strategies? [Abstract]. 12th Cochrane Colloquium, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 2-6 October 2004. Disponibile a: www.cochrane.org/colloquia/abstracts/ottawa/P-039.htm. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
66. Zhang L, Sampson M, McGowan J. Reporting of the role of expert searcher in Cochrane reviews. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice. 2006;1:3-16.
67. Turner EH, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, Tell RA, Rosenthal R. Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:252-60.
68. Alejandria MM, Lansang MA, Dans LF, Mantaring JB. Intravenous immunoglobulin for treating sepsis and septic shock. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002:CD001090.
69. Golder S, McIntosh HM, Duffy S, Glanville J; Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and UK Cochrane Centre Search Filters Design Group. Developing efficient search strategies to identify reports of adverse effects in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Health Info Libr J. 2006;23:3-12.
70. Sampson M, McGowan J, Cogo E, Grimshaw J, Moher D, Lefebvre C. An evidence-based practice guideline for the peer review of electronic search strategies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009.
71. Flores-Mir C, Major MP, Major PW. Search and selection methodology of systematic reviews in orthodontics (2000-2004). Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130:214-7.
72. Major MP, Major PW, Flores-Mir C. An evaluation of search and selection methods used in dental systematic reviews published in English. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137:1252-7.
73. Major MP, Major PW, Flores-Mir C. Benchmarking of reported search and selection methods of systematic reviews by dental speciality. Evid Based Dent. 2007;8:66-70.
74. Shah MR, Hasselblad V, Stevenson LW, Binanay C, O’Connor CM, Sopko G, et al. Impact of the pulmonary artery catheter in critically ill patients: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA. 2005;294:1664-70.
75. Edwards P, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Pratap S, Roberts I, Wentz R. Identification of randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews: accuracy and reliability of screening records. Stat Med. 2002;21:1635-40.
76. Cooper HM, Ribble RG. Influences on the outcome of literature searches for integrative research reviews. Science Communication. 1989;10:179-201.
77. Mistiaen P, Poot E. Telephone follow-up, initiated by a hospital-based health professional, for postdischarge problems in patients discharged from hospital to home. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006:CD004510.
78. Jones AP, Remmington T, Williamson PR, Ashby D, Smyth RL. High prevalence but low impact of data extraction and reporting errors were found in Cochrane systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:741-2.
79. Clarke M, Hopewell S, Juszczak E, Eisinga A, Kjeldstrøm M. Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006:CD004002.
80. Trame`r MR, Reynolds DJ, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis: a case study. BMJ. 1997;315:635-40.
81. von Elm E, Poglia G, Walder B, Trame`rMR. Different patterns of duplicate publication: an analysis of articles used in systematic reviews. JAMA. 2004;291: 974-80.
82. Gøtzsche PC. Multiple publication of reports of drug trials. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1989;36:429-32.
83. Allen C, Hopewell S, Prentice A. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for pain in women with endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005: CD004753.
84. Glasziou P, Meats E, Heneghan C, Shepperd S. What is missing from descriptions of treatment in trials and reviews? BMJ. 2008;336:1472-4.
85. Tracz MJ, Sideras K, Bolon˜a ER, Haddad RM, Kennedy CC, Uraga MV, et al. Testosterone use in men and its effects on bone health. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;91:2011-6.
86. Bucher HC, Hengstler P, Schindler C, Guyatt GH. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus medical treatment for non-acute coronary heart disease: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2000;321:73-7.
87. Gluud LL. Bias in clinical intervention research. Am J Epidemiol. 2006;163: 493-501.
88. Pildal J, Hro´bjartsson A, Jørgensen KJ, Hilden J, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC. Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36:847-57.
89. Moja LP, Telaro E, D’Amico R, Moschetti I, Coe L, Liberati A. Assessment of methodological quality of primary studies by systematic reviews: results of the metaquality cross sectional study. BMJ. 2005;330:1053.
90. Moher D, Jadad AR, Tugwell P. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials. Current issues and future directions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1996;12:195-208.
91. Sanderson S, Tatt ID, Higgins JP. Tools for assessing quality and suscepti-bility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology: a systematic review and annotated bibliography. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36:666-76.
92. Greenland S. Invited commentary: a critical look at some popular metaanalytic methods. Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140:290-6.
93. Ju¨ni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2001;323:42-6.
94. Kunz R, Oxman AD. The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials. BMJ. 1998;317: 1185-90.
95. Balk EM, Bonis PA, Moskowitz H, Schmid CH, Ioannidis JP, Wang C, et al. Correlation of quality measures with estimates of treatment effect in metaanalyses of randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 2002;287:2973-82.
96. Devereaux PJ, Beattie WS, Choi PT, Badner NH, Guyatt GH, Villar JC, et al. How strong is the evidence for the use of perioperative beta blockers in non-cardiac surgery? Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2005;331:313-21.
97. Devereaux PJ, Bhandari M, Montori VM, Manns BJ, Ghali WA, Guyatt GH. Double blind, you are the weakest link—good-bye! [Editorial]. ACP J Club. 2002;136:A11.
98. van Nieuwenhoven CA, Buskens E, van Tiel FH, Bonten MJ. Relationship between methodological trial quality and the effects of selective digestive decontamination on pneumonia and mortality in critically ill patients. JAMA. 2001; 286:335-40.
99. Guyatt GH, Cook D, Devereaux PJ, Meade M, Straus S. Therapy. In: Rennie D, Guyatt G, eds. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature. Chicago: AMA Pr; 2002:55-79.
100. Sackett DL, Gent M. Controversy in counting and attributing events in clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 1979;301:1410-2.
101. Montori VM, Devereaux PJ, Adhikari NK, Burns KE, Eggert CH, Briel M, et al. Randomized trials stopped early for benefit: a systematic review. JAMA. 2005;294:2203-9.
102. Guyatt GH, Devereaux PJ. Therapy and validity: the principle of intention-to-treat. In: Guyatt GH, Rennie DR, eds. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature. Chicago: AMA Press; 2002:267-73.
103. Berlin JA. Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? University of Pennsylvania Meta-analysis Blinding Study Group [Letter]. Lancet. 1997;350:185-6.
104. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17:1-12.
105. Pittas AG, Siegel RD, Lau J. Insulin therapy for critically ill hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 2004; 164:2005-11.
106. Lakhdar R, Al-Mallah MH, Lanfear DE. Safety and tolerability of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor versus the combination of angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker in patients with left ventricular dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Card Fail. 2008;14:181-8.
107. Bobat R, Coovadia H, Stephen C, Naidoo KL, McKerrow N, Black RE, et al. Safety and efficacy of zinc supplementation for children with HIV-1 infection in South Africa: a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;366:1862-7.
108. Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Effect measures for meta-analysis of trials with binary outcomes. In: Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG, eds. Systematic Reviews in Healthcare: Meta-Analysis in Context. 2nd ed. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 2001.
109. Deeks JJ. Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes. Stat Med. 2002;21:1575-600.
110. Engels EA, Schmid CH, Terrin N, Olkin I, Lau J. Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses. Stat Med. 2000;19:1707-28.
111. Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Ghersi D, Burdett S, Sydes MR. Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis. Trials. 2007;8:16.
112. Michiels S, Piedbois P, Burdett S, Syz N, Stewart L, Pignon JP. Metaanalysis when only the median survival times are known: a comparison with individual patient data results. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:119-25.
113. Briel M, Studer M, Glass TR, Bucher HC. Effects of statins on stroke prevention in patients with and without coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Med. 2004;117:596-606.
114. Jones M, Schenkel B, Just J, Fallowfield L. Epoetin alfa improves quality of life in patients with cancer: results of metaanalysis. Cancer. 2004;101:1720-32.
115. Elbourne DR, Altman DG, Higgins JP, Curtin F, Worthington HV, Vail A. Meta-analyses involving cross-over trials: methodological issues. Int J Epidemiol. 2002;31:140-9.
116. Follmann D, Elliott P, Suh I, Cutler J. Variance imputation for overviews of clinical trials with continuous response. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:769-73.
117. Wiebe N, Vandermeer B, Platt RW, Klassen TP, Moher D, Barrowman NJ. A systematic review identifies a lack of standardization in methods for handling missing variance data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:342-53.
118. Hro´bjartsson A, Gøtzsche PC. Placebo interventions for all clinical conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004:CD003974.
119. Shekelle PG, Morton SC, Maglione M, Suttorp M, Tu W, Li Z, et al. Pharmacological and surgical treatment of obesity. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ). 2004:1-6.
120. Chan AW, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomized trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. BMJ. 2005;330: 753.
121. Williamson PR, Gamble C. Identification and impact of outcome selection bias in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2005;24:1547-61.
122. Williamson PR, Gamble C, Altman DG, Hutton JL. Outcome selection bias in meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res. 2005;14:515-24.
123. Ioannidis JP, Trikalinos TA. The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: a large survey. CMAJ. 2007;176:1091-6.
124. Briel M, Schwartz GG, Thompson PL, de Lemos JA, Blazing MA, van Es GA, et al. Effects of early treatment with statins on short-term clinical outcomes in acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 2006;295:2046-56.
125. Song F, Eastwood AJ, Gilbody S, Duley L, Sutton AJ. Publication and related biases. Health Technol Assess. 2000;4:1-115.
126. Schmid CH, Stark PC, Berlin JA, Landais P, Lau J. Meta-regression detected associations between heterogeneous treatment effects and study-level, but not patient-level, factors. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:683-97.
127. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression. Stat Med. 2004;23:1663-82.
128. Thompson SG, Higgins JP. Treating individuals 4: can meta-analysis help target interventions at individuals most likely to benefit? Lancet. 2005;365:341-6.
129. Uitterhoeve RJ, Vernooy M, Litjens M, Potting K, Bensing J, De Mulder P, et al. Psychosocial interventions for patients with advanced cancer - a systematic review of the literature. Br J Cancer. 2004;91:1050-62.
130. Fuccio L, Minardi ME, Zagari RM, Grilli D, Magrini N, Bazzoli F. Meta-analysis: duration of first-line proton-pump inhibitor based triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:553-62.
131. Egger M, Smith GD. Bias in location and selection of studies. BMJ. 1998; 316:61-6.
132. Ravnskov U. Cholesterol lowering trials in coronary heart disease: frequency of citation and outcome. BMJ. 1992;305:15-9.
133. Hind D, Booth A. Do health technology assessments comply with QUOROM diagram guidance? An empirical study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:49.
134. Curioni C, Andre´ C. Rimonabant for overweight or obesity. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006:CD006162.
135. DeCamp LR, Byerley JS, Doshi N, Steiner MJ. Use of antiemetic agents in acute gastroenteritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2008;162:858-65.
136. Pakos EE, Ioannidis JP. Radiotherapy vs. nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the prevention of heterotopic ossification after major hip procedures: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;60:888-95.
137. Skalsky K, Yahav D, Bishara J, Pitlik S, Leibovici L, Paul M. Treatment of human brucellosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2008;336:701-4.
138. Altman DG, Cates C. The need for individual trial results in reports of systematic reviews [Rapid Response]. BMJ. Published 25 October 2001. Disponibile a: www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/28/need-individual-trial-results-reports-systematic-reviews. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
139. Gøtzsche PC, Hro´bjartsson A, Maric K, Tendal B. Data extraction errors in meta-analyses that use standardized mean differences. JAMA. 2007;298:430-7.
140. Lewis S, Clarke M. Forest plots: trying to see the wood and the trees. BMJ. 2001;322:1479-80.
141. Papanikolaou PN, Ioannidis JP. Availability of large-scale evidence on specific harms from systematic reviews of randomized trials. Am J Med. 2004;117: 582-9.
142. Duffett M, Choong K, Ng V, Randolph A, Cook DJ. Surfactant therapy for acute respiratory failure in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2007;11:R66.
143. Balk E, Raman G, Chung M, Ip S, Tatsioni A, Alonso A, et al. Effectiveness of management strategies for renal artery stenosis: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:901-12.
144. Palfreyman S, Nelson EA, Michaels JA. Dressings for venous leg ulcers: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2007;335:244.
145. Ioannidis JP, Patsopoulos NA, Evangelou E. Uncertainty in heterogeneity estimates in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2007;335:914-6.
146. Appleton KM, Hayward RC, Gunnell D, Peters TJ, Rogers PJ, Kessler D, et al. Effects of n-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids on depressed mood: systematic review of published trials. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;84:1308-16.
147. Kirsch I, Deacon BJ, Huedo-Medina TB, Scoboria A, Moore TJ, Johnson BT. Initial severity and antidepressant benefits: a meta-analysis of data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. PLoS Med. 2008;5:e45.
148. Reichenbach S, Sterchi R, Scherer M, Trelle S, Bu¨rgi E, Bu¨rgi U, et al. Meta-analysis: chondroitin for osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:580-90.
149. Hodson EM, Craig JC, Strippoli GF, Webster AC. Antiviral medications for preventing cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008:CD003774.
150. Thompson SG, Higgins JP. How should meta-regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted? Stat Med. 2002;21:1559-73.
151. Chan AW, Krleza-Jeric´ K, Schmid I, Altman DG. Outcome reporting bias in randomized trials funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. CMAJ. 2004;171:735-40.
152. Hahn S, Williamson PR, Hutton JL, Garner P, Flynn EV. Assessing the potential for bias in meta-analysis due to selective reporting of subgroup analyses within studies. Stat Med. 2000;19:3325-36.
153. Green LW, Glasgow RE. Evaluating the relevance, generalization, and applicability of research: issues in external validation and translation methodology. Eval Health Prof. 2006;29:126-53.
154. Liberati A, D’Amico R, Pifferi, Torri V, Brazzi L. Antibiotic prophylaxis to reduce respiratory tract infections and mortality in adults receiving intensive care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004:CD000022.
155. Gonzalez R, Zamora J, Gomez-Camarero J, Molinero LM, Ban˜ares R, Albillos A. Meta-analysis: Combination endoscopic and drug therapy to prevent variceal rebleeding in cirrhosis. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:109-22.
156. D’Amico R, Pifferi S, Leonetti C, Torri V, Tinazzi A, Liberati A. Effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in critically ill adult patients: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 1998;316:1275-85.
157. Olsen O, Middleton P, Ezzo J, Gøtzsche PC, Hadhazy V, Herxheimer A, et al. Quality of Cochrane reviews: assessment of sample from 1998. BMJ. 2001; 323:829-32.
158. Hopewell S, Wolfenden L, Clarke M. Reporting of adverse events in systematic reviews can be improved: survey results. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:597-602.
159. Cook DJ, Reeve BK, Guyatt GH, Heyland DK, Griffith LE, Buckingham L, et al. Stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients. Resolving discordant meta-analyses. JAMA. 1996;275:308-14.
160. Jadad AR, Cook DJ, Browman GP. A guide to interpreting discordant systematic reviews. CMAJ. 1997;156:1411-6.
161. Clarke L, Clarke M, Clarke T. How useful are Cochrane reviews in identifying research needs? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007;12:101-3.
162. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2000;284:3043-5.
163. Clarke M, Hopewell S, Chalmers I. Reports of clinical trials should begin and end with up-to-date systematic reviews of other relevant evidence: a status report. J R Soc Med. 2007;100:187-90.
164. Dube´ C, Rostom A, Lewin G, Tsertsvadze A, Barrowman N, Code C, Sampson M, Moher D; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. The use of aspirin for primary prevention of colorectal cancer: a systematic review prepared for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:365-75.
165. Critchley J, Bates I. Haemoglobin colour scale for anaemia diagnosis where there is no laboratory: a systematic review. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34:1425-34.
166. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ. 2003; 326:1167-70.
167. Als-Nielsen B, Chen W, Gluud C, Kjaergard LL. Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? JAMA. 2003;290:921-8.
168. Peppercorn J, Blood E, Winer E, Partridge A. Association between pharmaceutical involvement and outcomes in breast cancer clinical trials. Cancer. 2007;109:1239-46.
169. Yank V, Rennie D, Bero LA. Financial ties and concordance between results and conclusions in meta-analyses: retrospective cohort study. BMJ. 2007; 335:1202-5.
170. Jørgensen AW, Hilden J, Gøtzsche PC. Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: systematic review. BMJ. 2006;333:782.
171. Gøtzsche PC, Hro´bjartsson A, Johansen HK, Haahr MT, Altman DG, Chan AW. Ghost authorship in industry-initiated randomised trials. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e19.
172. Akbari A, Mayhew A, Al-Alawi MA, Grimshaw J, Winkens R, Glidewell E, et al. Interventions to improve outpatient referrals from primary care to secondary care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008:CD005471.
173. Davies P, Boruch R. The Campbell Collaboration. Does for public policy what cochrane does for health [Editorial]. BMJ. 2001;323:294-5.
174. Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review—a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10 Suppl 1:21-34.
175. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O, Peacock R. Storylines of research in diffusion of innovation: a meta-narrative approach to systematic review. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61:417-30.
176. Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2002;21:2313-24.
177. Salanti G, Higgins JP, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP. Evaluation of networks of randomized trials. Stat Methods Med Res. 2008;17:279-301.
178. Altman DG, Moher D. [Developing guidelines for reporting healthcare research: scientific rationale and procedures.]. Med Clin (Barc). 2005;125 Suppl 1:8-13.
179. Delaney A, Bagshaw SM, Ferland A, Manns B, Laupland KB, Doig CJ. A systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in the critical care literature. Crit Care. 2005;9:R575-82.
180. Altman DG, Simera I, Hoey J, Moher D, Schulz K. EQUATOR: reporting guidelines for health research. Lancet. 2008;371:1149-50.
181. Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A, Schulz K, Altman DG, Hill C, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust. 2006;185:263-7.
182. Simera I, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF, Hoey J. Guidelines for reporting health research: the EQUATOR network’s survey of guideline authors. PLoS Med. 2008;5:e139.
183. Last JM. A Dictionary of Epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford Univ Pr and International Epidemiological Assoc; 2001.
184. Antman EM, Lau J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA. 1992;268:240-8.
185. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. The science of reviewing research. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993;703:125-33; discussion 133-4.
186. O’Connor D, Green S, Higgins JPT. Chapter 5: Defining the review question and developing criteria for including studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Disponibile a: www.cochrane-handbook.org. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
187. McDonagh M, Whiting P, Bradley M, Cooper J, Sutton A, Chestnutt I, et al. A systematic review of public water fluoridation. Protocol changes (Appendix M). NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. York: Univ of York; 2000. Disponibile a: www.nhs.uk/conditions/fluoride/documents/crdreport18.pdf. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.
188. Moher D, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Tugwell P, Moher M, Jones A, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials: implications for the conduct of meta-analyses. Health Technol Assess. 1999;3:i-iv, 1-98.
189. Devereaux PJ, Choi PT, El-Dika S, Bhandari M, Montori VM, Schu¨nemann HJ, et al. An observational study found that authors of randomized controlled trials frequently use concealment of randomization and blinding, despite the failure to report these methods. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:1232-6.
190. Soares HP, Daniels S, Kumar A, Clarke M, Scott C, Swann S, et al; Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. BMJ. 2004;328:22-4.
191. Liberati A, Himel HN, Chalmers TC. A quality assessment of randomized control trials of primary treatment of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4:942-51.
192. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, Penman M, Tugwell P, Walsh S. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16:62-73.
193. Greenland S, O’Rourke K. On the bias produced by quality scores in meta-analysis, and a hierarchical view of proposed solutions. Biostatistics. 2001;2:463-71.
194. Ju¨ni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999;282:1054-60.
195. Fleiss JL. The statistical basis of meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res. 1993;2:121-45.
196. Villar J, Mackey ME, Carroli G, Donner A. Meta-analyses in systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials in perinatal medicine: comparison of fixed and random effects models. Stat Med. 2001;20:3635-47.
197. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Schmid CH. Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough. Lancet. 1998;351:123-7.
198. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177-88.
199. Hunter JE, Schmidt FL. Fixed effects vs. random effects meta-analysis models: Implications for cumulative research knowledge. International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 2000:8:275-92.
200. Deeks JJ, Altman DG, Bradburn MJ. Statistical methods for examining heterogeneity and combining results from several studies in meta-analysis. In: Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman DG, eds. Systematic Reviews in Healthcare: Meta-Analysis in Context. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 2001:285-312. 201. Warn DE, Thompson SG, Spiegelhalter DJ. Bayesian random effects meta-analysis of trials with binary outcomes: methods for the absolute risk difference and relative risk scales. Stat Med. 2002;21:1601-23.
201. Warn DE, Thompson SG, Spiegelhalter DJ. Bayesian random effects meta-analysis of trials with binary outcomes: methods for the absolute risk difference and relative risk scales. Stat Med. 2002;21:1601-23.
202. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327:557-60.
203. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21:1539-58.
204. Huedo-Medina TB, Sa´nchez-Meca J, Mari´n-Marti´nez F, Botella J. Assessin heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index? Psychol Methods. 2006;11:193-206.
205. Thompson SG, Turner RM, Warn DE. Multilevel models for metaanalysis, and their application to absolute risk differences. Stat Methods Med Res. 2001;10:375-92.
206. Dickersin K. Publication bias: recognising the problem, understanding its origin and scope, and preventing harm. In: Rothstein HR, Sutton AJ, Borenstein M, eds. Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis—Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments. West Sussex, UK: J Wiley; 2005:356.
207. Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007:MR000005.
208. Krzyzanowska MK, Pintilie M, Tannock IF. Factors associated with failure to publish large randomized trials presented at an oncology meeting. JAMA. 2003;290:495-501.
209. Hopewell S, Clarke M. Methodologists and their methods. Do methodologists write up their conference presentations or is it just 15 minutes of fame? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2001;17:601-3.
210. Ghersi D. Issues in the design, conduct and reporting of clinical trials that impact on the quality of decision making [PhD thesis]. Sydney, Australia: School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Univ of Sydney; 2006.
211. von Elm E, Ro¨llin A, Blu¨mle A, Huwiler K, Witschi M, Egger M. Publication and non-publication of clinical trials: longitudinal study of applications submitted to a research ethics committee. Swiss Med Wkly. 2008;138:197-203.
212. Sterne JA, Egger M. Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis: guidelines on choice of axis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:1046-55.
213. Harbord RM, Egger M, Sterne JA. A modified test for small-study effects in meta-analyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints. Stat Med. 2006;25: 3443-57.
214. Peters JL, Sutton AJ, Jones DR, Abrams KR, Rushton L. Comparison of two methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. JAMA. 2006;295:676-80.
215. Rothstein HR, Sutton AJ, Borenstein M, eds. Publication Bias in Meta- Analysis—Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments. West Sussex, UK: J Wiley; 2005.
216. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Terrin N, Schmid CH, Olkin I. The case of the misleading funnel plot. BMJ. 2006;333:597-600.
217. Terrin N, Schmid CH, Lau J. In an empirical evaluation of the funnel plot, researchers could not visually identify publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:894-901.
218. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629-34.
219. Ioannidis JP, Trikalinos TA. An exploratory test for an excess of significant findings. Clin Trials. 2007;4:245-53.
220. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Moher D. Chapter 10: Addressing reporting biases. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Disponibile a: www.cochrane-handbook.org. Ultimo accesso: 27 giugno 2015.