Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2021
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2021
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Review * Synthèse

A guide to interpreting discordant systematic reviews

A. R. Jadad, D. J. Cook and G. P. Browman
CMAJ May 15, 1997 156 (10) 1411-1416;
A. R. Jadad
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D. J. Cook
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
G. P. Browman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Systematic reviews are becoming prominent tools to guide health care decisions. As the number of published systematic reviews increases, it is common to find more than 1 systematic review addressing the same or a very similar therapeutic question. Despite the promise for systematic reviews to resolve conflicting results of primary studies, conflicts among reviews are now emerging. Such conflicts produce difficulties for decision-makers (including clinicians, policy-makers, researchers and patients) who rely on these reviews to help them make choices among alternative interventions when experts and the results of trials disagree. The authors provide an adjunct decision tool--a decision algorithm--to help decision-makers select from among discordant reviews.

  • Copyright © 1997 by Canadian Medical Association
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

CMAJ
Vol. 156, Issue 10
15 May 1997
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A guide to interpreting discordant systematic reviews
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
A guide to interpreting discordant systematic reviews
A. R. Jadad, D. J. Cook, G. P. Browman
CMAJ May 1997, 156 (10) 1411-1416;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
A guide to interpreting discordant systematic reviews
A. R. Jadad, D. J. Cook, G. P. Browman
CMAJ May 1997, 156 (10) 1411-1416;
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • When to replicate systematic reviews of interventions: consensus checklist
  • Hyperosmolar therapy for acute brain injury: study protocol for an umbrella review of meta-analyses and an evidence mapping
  • Viscosupplementation in Knee Osteoarthritis: Evidence Revisited
  • The effects of excluding treatments from network meta-analyses: survey
  • Overlapping meta-analyses on the same topic: survey of published studies
  • Meta-Analyses in Joint Arthroplasty: A Review of Quantity, Quality, and Impact
  • The role of meta-analysis in the evaluation of the effects of early nutrition on mental and motor development in children
  • Controlled search term vocabularies for finding articles relevant to injury prevention and safety promotion
  • The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration
  • The impact of polyol-containing chewing gums on dental caries: A systematic review of original randomized controlled trials and observational studies
  • Issues related to the conduct of systematic reviews: a focus on the nutrition field
  • Meta-Analysis
  • On "Effectiveness of nonpharmacological and nonsurgical interventions..." Moe et al. Phys Ther. 2008;88: 1716-1727.
  • Effectiveness of Nonpharmacological and Nonsurgical Interventions for Hip Osteoarthritis: An Umbrella Review of High-Quality Systematic Reviews
  • Overlapping Systematic Reviews of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Comparing Hamstring Autograft with Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Autograft: Why Are They Different?
  • Compliance with QUOROM and quality of reporting of overlapping meta-analyses on the role of acetylcysteine in the prevention of contrast associated nephropathy: case study
  • Influenza vaccine for all?
  • Albumin for fluid resuscitation: Implications of the Saline Versus Albumin Fluid Evaluation
  • Review: St John's Wort may be less effective than previously thought in people with depression
  • Analysing the efficacy of clozapine
  • Meta-analyses and megatrials: neither is the infallible, universal standard
  • Evidence-Based Guidelines: Application to Clinical Practice
  • The need for caution in interpreting high quality systematic reviews
  • Overview of Evidence-based Medicine: Challenges for Evidence-based Laboratory Medicine
  • Calcium Antagonists for Ischemic Stroke : A Systematic Review
  • Does Locoregional Radiation Therapy Improve Survival in Breast Cancer? A Meta-Analysis
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Two tick-borne diseases in one: a case report of concurrent babesiosis and Lyme disease in Ontario
  • Canadian health expenditures: Where do we really stand internationally?
  • Tuberculosis: 7. Laboratory aspects of diagnosis
Show more Review * Synthèse

Similar Articles

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions

Copyright 2021, Joule Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of the resources on this site in an accessible format, please contact us at cmajgroup@cmaj.ca.

Powered by HighWire