A comparison of statistical methods for identifying out-of-date systematic reviews.
BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews (SRs) can provide accurate and reliable evidence, typically about the effectiveness of health interventions. Evidence is dynamic, and if SRs are out-of-date this information may not be useful; it may even be harmful. This study aimed to compare five statistical methods...
Main Authors: | Porjai Pattanittum, Malinee Laopaiboon, David Moher, Pisake Lumbiganon, Chetta Ngamjarus |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2012-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3502410?pdf=render |
Similar Items
-
Prognostic models for complete recovery in ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis
by: Nampet Jampathong, et al.
Published: (2018-03-01) -
Use of antenatal corticosteroids prior to preterm birth in four South East Asian countries within the SEA-ORCHID project
by: McDonald Steven J, et al.
Published: (2008-10-01) -
Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Pre-eclampsia and Normotensive Pregnancies
by: Ussanee Sangkomkamhang, et al.
Published: (2010-09-01) -
Chicken Essence for Cognitive Function Improvement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
by: Siew Li Teoh, et al.
Published: (2016-01-01) -
Time to update and quantitative changes in the results of cochrane pregnancy and childbirth reviews.
by: Wanlop Jaidee, et al.
Published: (2010-01-01)