Cargando…

Evaluating systematic reviews in urology: A practical guide

Systematic reviews of good quality randomized controlled trials that have little heterogeneity (variability) are considered to provide the best source of evidence for the efficacy of interventions in healthcare. With the recent national provision for access to The Cochrane Library to all residents i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Tharyan, Prathap
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2721595/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19718319
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.33441
_version_ 1782170221181665280
author Tharyan, Prathap
author_facet Tharyan, Prathap
author_sort Tharyan, Prathap
collection PubMed
description Systematic reviews of good quality randomized controlled trials that have little heterogeneity (variability) are considered to provide the best source of evidence for the efficacy of interventions in healthcare. With the recent national provision for access to The Cochrane Library to all residents in India, urologists and other clinicians now have access to this reliable source of regularly updated systematic reviews. This article uses six systematic reviews relevant to urologists from The Cochrane Library produced by different collaborative review groups in The Cochrane Collaboration to illustrate the methods used to minimize bias, improve transparency and provide reliable estimates of treatment effects. Issues in evaluating results, especially when subsequent trials produce discrepant results, are discussed.
format Text
id pubmed-2721595
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher Medknow Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27215952009-08-29 Evaluating systematic reviews in urology: A practical guide Tharyan, Prathap Indian J Urol Review Article Systematic reviews of good quality randomized controlled trials that have little heterogeneity (variability) are considered to provide the best source of evidence for the efficacy of interventions in healthcare. With the recent national provision for access to The Cochrane Library to all residents in India, urologists and other clinicians now have access to this reliable source of regularly updated systematic reviews. This article uses six systematic reviews relevant to urologists from The Cochrane Library produced by different collaborative review groups in The Cochrane Collaboration to illustrate the methods used to minimize bias, improve transparency and provide reliable estimates of treatment effects. Issues in evaluating results, especially when subsequent trials produce discrepant results, are discussed. Medknow Publications 2007 /pmc/articles/PMC2721595/ /pubmed/19718319 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.33441 Text en © Indian Journal of Urology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Tharyan, Prathap
Evaluating systematic reviews in urology: A practical guide
title Evaluating systematic reviews in urology: A practical guide
title_full Evaluating systematic reviews in urology: A practical guide
title_fullStr Evaluating systematic reviews in urology: A practical guide
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating systematic reviews in urology: A practical guide
title_short Evaluating systematic reviews in urology: A practical guide
title_sort evaluating systematic reviews in urology: a practical guide
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2721595/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19718319
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.33441
work_keys_str_mv AT tharyanprathap evaluatingsystematicreviewsinurologyapracticalguide