A Randomized Survey of the Preference of Gastroenterologists for a Cochrane Review versus a Traditional Narrative Review
BACKGROUND: Clinicians often rely on review material rather than analysis of primary research to guide therapy. Systematic reviews use methods to insure thoroughness and to minimize bias, but many clinicians are not familiar with systematic reviews and continue to rely on narrative reviews.
Saved in:
Main Authors: | John WD McDonald, Jeffrey Mahon, Kelly Zarnke, Brian Feagan, Lorinda Simms, Wayne Tucker |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wiley
2002-01-01
|
Series: | Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology |
Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2002/513758 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Similar Items
-
Quality of the systematic reviews in cochrane multiple sclerosis related articles
by: Masoud Zeynalzadeh, et al.
Published: (2024-11-01) -
The impact of Cochrane Reviews that apply network meta-analysis in clinical guidelines: A systematic review.
by: Sarah Donegan, et al.
Published: (2024-01-01) -
Review of David Carroll Cochran, The Catholic Case Against War: A Brief Guide
by: Marc Tumeinski
Published: (2025-01-01) -
Analytical Approach to the Selection of Research Topics for Gallstone Disease and Acute Cholecystitis (an Overview of Cochrane Reviews)
by: S. I. Panin, et al.
Published: (2023-12-01) -
Basic Science for the Clinical Gastroenterologist: A Review of the Recent Literature on the Small Bowel – Part II
by: ABR Thomson
Published: (1994-01-01)