THE PROMISE AND PITFALLS OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS
- 1 April 2006
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Annual Reviews in Annual Review of Public Health
- Vol. 27 (1) , 81-102
- https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.27.021405.102239
Abstract
▪ Abstract The systematic review “movement” that has transformed medical journal reports of clinical trials and reviews of clinical trials has taken hold in public health, with the most recent milestone, the publication of the first edition of The Guide to Community Health Services in 2005. In this paper we define and distinguish current terms, point out important resources for systematic reviews, describe the impact of systematic review on the quality of primary studies and summaries of the evidence, and provide perspectives on the promise of systematic reviews for shaping the agenda for public health research. Several pitfalls are discussed, including a false sense of rigor implied by the terms “systematic review” and “meta-analysis” and substantial variation in the validity of claims that a particular intervention is “evidence based,” and the difficulty of translating conclusions from systematic reviews into public health advocacy and practice.Keywords
This publication has 81 references indexed in Scilit:
- Books, Journals, New Media ReceivedPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,2005
- The Promises And Pitfalls Of Evidence-Based MedicineHealth Affairs, 2005
- Effect sizes for experimenting psychologists.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 2003
- How meta-analysis increases statistical power.Psychological Methods, 2003
- Treatments of Effect Sizes and Statistical Significance Tests in TextbooksEducational and Psychological Measurement, 2002
- Behavior change intervention research in healthcare settings: a review of recent reports with emphasis on external validityAmerican Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2002
- Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework.American Journal of Public Health, 1999
- Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?Controlled Clinical Trials, 1996
- A crisis in group therapy.American Psychologist, 1977
- Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of ResearchEducational Researcher, 1976