This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Cooper, N. J Articles by Sutton, A. J Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cooper, N. J Articles by Sutton, A. J Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The use of systematic reviews when designing studies

David R Jones

Centre for Biostatistics and Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

Alex J Sutton

Centre for Biostatistics and Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK 22-28 Priness Road West, Leicester LE1 6TP, UK njc21{at}le.ac.uk

Background The importance of systematic reviews in identifying gaps in the evidence base and providing a quantitative basis for informing new research initiatives is widely acknowledged, but little is known about what actually happens in practice. Our objective was to assess the use made of results of reviews in the designing of new studies.

Methods Of all Cochrane reviews published in 1996, those updated in 2002 or 2003 were identified. Authors of trials added in the updates were contacted and asked if use had been made of the 1996 Cochrane or other reviews in designing their study.

Results Of 32 authors of studies newly included in 33 Cochrane reviews which met our inclusion criteria, 24 (75%) responded. Eleven (46%) respondents were aware of the relevant Cochrane review at the time they designed their study. In eight (33%) cases the design of the new study had been influenced by a review; in two (8%) this was the relevant Cochrane review.

Conclusions Cautious interpretation of these results is necessary, but it is apparent that the proportion of study investigators using Cochrane or other systematic reviews in designing their new studies was very limited. Inclusion of encouragement in publication or application guidelines to consider and cite review results is desirable.

Clinical Trials, Vol. 2, No. 3, 260-264 (2005)
DOI: 10.1191/1740774505cn090oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?