Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Pitfalls in systematic reviews.

Cynthia Farquhar1, Andy Vail

  • 1Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. c.farquhar@auckland.ac.nz

Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology
|June 24, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Stroke Associated-Infections after Mechanical Thrombectomy: Analysis of the Stroke-Associated INfection afTer Mechanical Thrombectomy (SAINT-MT) study.

Cerebrovascular diseases extra·2026
Same author

Statistical reviewing for a medical journal: summary of workshop proceedings.

Research integrity and peer review·2026
Same author

PGT-A is associated with a reduced live birth rate in routine practice: evidence from the UK ART register.

Reproductive biomedicine online·2026
Same author

Reply of the authors: "World Health Organization infertility guidelines, 2025".

Fertility and sterility·2026
Same author

Feasibility study of a smartphone app to monitor systemic sclerosis-related digital ulcers-a potential new tool for remote clinical monitoring.

Rheumatology advances in practice·2026
Same author

Recommendations from the WHO guideline for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infertility.

Fertility and sterility·2025
Same journal

Management of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy.

Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology·2026
Same journal

Updates in group prenatal care research.

Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology·2026
Same journal

Complex benign gynecology in perimenopause: current evidence and future directions.

Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology·2026
Same journal

Role of insulin in female reproduction.

Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology·2026
Same journal

Urinary tract involvement in endometriosis: current evidence and clinical insights into navigating diagnosis and management.

Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology·2026
Same journal

Updates in ultrasound imaging of adenomyosis and clinical impacts.

Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology·2026
See all related articles

Systematic reviews are crucial for evidence-based medicine but face challenges. Addressing pitfalls like bias and quality assessment ensures reliable clinical decision-making.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Research Methodology
  • Evidence Synthesis
  • Clinical Practice Guidelines

Background:

  • Evidence-based medicine (EBM) integrates clinical expertise with research evidence.
  • Systematic reviews are a key source of external clinical evidence for EBM.
  • Systematic reviews present unique challenges for researchers and users.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To identify and discuss common pitfalls in conducting systematic reviews.
  • To highlight challenges faced by researchers and users of systematic reviews.
  • To emphasize the importance of addressing these challenges for clinical utility.

Main Methods:

  • Review of common errors and biases in systematic review methodology.
  • Analysis of critical steps in the systematic review process.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Identification of factors impacting the clinical value of systematic reviews.

    • Main Results:

    • Common pitfalls include inadequate study quality assessment, funding and publication bias.
    • Reliance on non-informative outcomes and analysis errors are frequent issues.
    • Incorrect use of evidence statements can mislead clinical decision-making.

    Conclusions:

    • Systematic reviews involve multiple steps from question development to updating.
    • Awareness and mitigation of identified pitfalls are essential for authors.
    • Addressing these issues ensures systematic reviews provide valuable clinical evidence.