Reporting of adverse events in systematic reviews can be improved: survey results
Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyPublished 15 April 2008
Sally Hopewell, Luke Wolfenden, Mike Clarke
Citations68
SJR quartileQ1
SJR score3.15
SNIP2.66
Generate an AI Snapshot to get a quick, structured summary of this paper.
Study Snapshot
ObjectiveStudy objective
MethodsResearch methodology
PopulationPopulation studied
Sample sizeSample sizes
OutcomesStudy outcomes here
ResultsStudy results comes here
LimitationsResearch study limitations comes here
A concise AI-generated summary of the paper will appear here once you click Generate AI Snapshot.
TL;DR
Most Cochrane reviews of drug interventions considered adverse events, but this was not the case for DARE reviews and for Cochrane Reviews of nondrug interventions.
Abstract
Most Cochrane reviews of drug interventions considered adverse events. This was not the case for DARE reviews and for Cochrane reviews of nondrug interventions. This could be improved.
Keywords
Social SciencesDecision SciencesHealth Professions
Europe PMC (PubMed Central)The Cochrane Library
2,042 Citations2005Deborah H. Charbonneau
The new interface to the Cochrane Library provides easy access to a collection of high-quality, evidence-based health care databases assembled by the Cochran Collaboration and related organizations including the United Kingdom's National Health Service (NHS).
Annals of Internal MedicineBetter Reporting of Harms in Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement
1,522 Citations2004John P. A. Ioannidis, Stephen J.W. Evans +6 more
This work searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library using a wide array of terms related to harms and identified pertinent evidence and made recommendations on the appropriate reporting of harms in RCTs.
PubMedCompleteness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas.
568 Citations2001John P. A. Ioannidis, Joseph Lau
Current standards for safety reporting in randomized trials should be revised to address this inadequacy, as generalizable data on drug safety reporting are sparse and largely inadequate.
Canadian Medical Association JournalComparison of evidence on harms of medical interventions in randomized and nonrandomized studies
230 Citations2006Panagiotis N. Papanikolaou
Evidence from randomized trials is compared with that from epidemiologic studies to determine whether they give different estimates of risk for important harms of medical interventions, and nonrandomized studies are often conservative in estimating absolute risks of harms.
Annals of Internal MedicineChallenges in Systematic Reviews That Assess Treatment Harms
147 Citations2005Roger Chou, Mark Helfand
BMC Clinical PharmacologyReporting of adverse drug reactions in randomised controlled trials – a systematic survey
129 Citations2001Yoon K. Loke, Sheena Derry
BMC Medical Research MethodologyIncomplete evidence: the inadequacy of databases in tracing published adverse drug reactions in clinical trials
111 Citations2001Sheena Derry, Yoon K. Loke +1 more
Specific search strategies based on adverse effects textwords and indexing terms will fail to identify nearly a quarter of trials that report on the rate of drug adverse effects.
BMJAssessment of therapeutic safety in systematic reviews: literature review
94 Citations2001E. Ernst, M.H. Pittler
The American Journal of MedicineAvailability of large-scale evidence on specific harms from systematic reviews of randomized trials
75 Citations2004Panagiotis N. Papanikolaou, John P. A. Ioannidis
To assess how frequently systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials convey large-scale evidence on specific, well-defined adverse events, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched.
BMC Medical Research MethodologyRoom for improvement? A survey of the methods used in systematic reviews of adverse effects
74 Citations2006Su Golder, Yoon K. Loke +1 more
Where methodological research is most needed to improve systematic reviews of adverse effects of health care interventions, a descriptive analysis of systematic reviews published between 1994 and 2005 found the methodology around identification and quality assessment of primary data is the main concern.
BMC Medical Research MethodologyAssessing harmful effects in systematic Reviews
70 Citations2004Heather M McIntosh, Nerys Woolacott +1 more
Annals of Internal MedicineReporting of Harm in Randomized, Controlled Trials of Nonpharmacologic Treatment for Rheumatic Disease
49 Citations2005Morgane Ethgen, Isabelle Boutron +4 more
An analysis of 193 treatment trials for rheumatic disease found that trials evaluating pharmacologic therapies reported data about potential adverse events and harm more often than trials evaluating nonpharmacologic treatments.
BMC Medical Research MethodologyIdentifying systematic reviews of the adverse effects of health care interventions
26 Citations2006Su Golder, Heather M McIntosh +1 more
Searching major databases of systematic reviews, for systematic reviews of adverse effects, proved more difficult than anticipated due to a lack of standard terminology used by the authors, inadequate indexing and the variations in the search interfaces of the databases.