The quality of systematic reviews. Review is biased

S Senn

Comment

S Senn. BMJ. 2000.

. 2000 Jul 29;321(7256):297.

S Senn

No abstract available

Comment in

The quality of systematic reviews. High quality reporting of both randomised trials and systematic reviews should be priority.
Altman DG, Deeks JJ, Clarke M, Cates C. Altman DG, et al. BMJ. 2000 Jul 29;321(7256):297; author reply 298-9. BMJ. 2000. PMID: 10979692 No abstract available.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation.
Jadad AR, Moher M, Browman GP, Booker L, Sigouin C, Fuentes M, Stevens R. Jadad AR, et al. BMJ. 2000 Feb 26;320(7234):537-40. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7234.537. BMJ. 2000. PMID: 10688558 Free PMC article.

1. Jadad AR, Moher M, Browman GP, Booker L, Sigouin C, Fuentes M, et al. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation. BMJ. 2000;320:537–540. . (26 February.) - PMC - PubMed
1. International Conference on Harmonisation Statistical. Principles for clinical trials. Statist Med. 1999;18:1905–1942. - PubMed
1. Richardson W, Bablok B. Clinical experience with formoterol in adults. In: Holgate ST, editor. Formoterol: fast and long-lasting bronchodilation. London: Royal Society of Medicine Services; 1992. pp. 23–37.
1. Senn S. Biased review. bmj.com 2000;320 (bmj.com/cgi/eletters/320/7234/537#EL2; accessed 26 June).
1. Jadad AR, Moher M, Browman GP, Booker L, Sigouin C, Fuentes M, et al. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation. BMJ. 2000;320:537–540. . (26 February.) - PMC - PubMed