Reviewing the Reviews
JAMAPublished 15 July 1998Open access
John W. Joyce, Sophia Rabe‐Hesketh, Simon Wessely
Citations43
SJR quartileQ1
SJR score5.35
SNIP10.71
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
Test the hypothesis that the selection of literature in review articles is unsystematic and is influenced by the authors' discipline and country of residence by searching reviews in English published between 1980 and March 1996.
Abstract
Citation of the literature is influenced by review authors' discipline and nationality.
Keywords
Social SciencesDecision SciencesMedicine
Annals of Internal MedicineThe Medical Review Article: State of the Science
854 Citations1987Cynthia D. Mulrow
It is indicated that current medical reviews do not routinely use scientific methods to identify, assess, and synthesize information.
The LancetCompleteness of reporting of trials published in languages other than English: implications for conduct and reporting of systematic reviews
538 Citations1996David Moher, Paul R. Fortin +7 more
These results provide evidence for inclusion of all trial reports, irrespective of the language in which they are published, in systematic reviews, likely to increase precision and may reduce systematic errors.
Journal of Clinical EpidemiologySelecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis: Is there a tower of babel bias?
534 Citations1995Geneviève Grégoire, François Derderian +1 more
This study demonstrates that, in at least one out of 36 consecutive meta-analyses the exclusion of papers for linguistic reasons produced results different from those which would have been obtained if this exclusion criteria had not been used.
Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyAgreement among reviewers of review articles
283 Citations1991Andrew D Oxman, Gordon Guyatt +5 more
Assessment of the consistency of an index of the scientific quality of research overviews found it was possible to achieve reasonable to excellent agreement for all of the items in the index, including the overall assessment of scientific quality.
The American Journal of MedicinePeer review in biomedical publication
242 Citations1974Franz J. Ingelfinger
Concurrence between two reviewers of each of some 500 papers submitted to the New England Journal of Medicine was only moderately better than a chance result, and the reviewing system was important to maintain standards.
JAMAMinimizing the Three Stages of Publication Bias
225 Citations1990Thomas C. Chalmers
Bias can be minimized by insisting on high-quality research and thorough literature reviews, eliminating the double standard concerning peer review and informed consent applied to clinical research and practice, and publishing legitimate trials regardless of their results.
Journal of General Internal MedicineSystematic errors in medical decision making:
212 Citations1987Neal V. Dawson, Hal R. Arkes
Five factors that can detract from accurate probability estimation and three that impair accurate information synthesis are discussed, and ways to minimize the negative influences of these factors are suggested.
Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyMeta-analyses to evaluate analgesic interventions: A systematic qualitative review of their methodology
208 Citations1996Alejandro R. Jadad, Henry J McQuay
Ninety percent of the meta-analyses had methodological flaws that could limit their validity and the main deficiencies were lack of information on methods to retrieve and to assess the validity of primary studies and lack of data on the design of the primary studies.
PubMedNational bias: a comparison of citation practices by health professionals.
187 Citations1990Frank Campbell
It is hypothesized that health professionals in the United States and the United Kingdom are nationally biased in their citation practices, and results suggest that U.S. and U.K. authors publishing in the New England Journal of Medicine and Lancet tend to cite material produced in their own countries more than would be warranted by the amount of material produced by these countries.