Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: How will we ever keep up?

Hilda Bastian, Paul Glasziou, Iain Chalmers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

481 Citations (Scopus)
56 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Summary Points
When Archie Cochrane reproached the medical profession for not having critical summaries of all randomised controlled trials, about 14 reports of trials were being published per day. There are now 75 trials, and 11 systematic reviews of trials, per day and a plateau in growth has not yet been reached.
Although trials, reviews, and health technology assessments have undoubtedly had major impacts, the staple of medical literature synthesis remains the non-systematic narrative review. Only a small minority of trial reports are being analysed in up-to-date systematic reviews. Given the constraints, Archie Cochrane's vision will not be achieved without some serious changes in course.
To meet the needs of patients, clinicians, and policymakers, unnecessary trials need to be reduced, and systematic reviews need to be prioritised. Streamlining and innovation in methods of systematic reviewing are necessary to enable valid answers to be found for most patient questions. Finally, clinicians and patients require open access to these important resources.
Original languageEnglish
Article numbere1000326
JournalPLoS Medicine
Volume7
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2010

Fingerprint

Biomedical Technology Assessment
Randomized Controlled Trials
Growth

Cite this

@article{0ad39813694e4afea98d61b1a616d9a2,
title = "Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: How will we ever keep up?",
abstract = "Summary PointsWhen Archie Cochrane reproached the medical profession for not having critical summaries of all randomised controlled trials, about 14 reports of trials were being published per day. There are now 75 trials, and 11 systematic reviews of trials, per day and a plateau in growth has not yet been reached.Although trials, reviews, and health technology assessments have undoubtedly had major impacts, the staple of medical literature synthesis remains the non-systematic narrative review. Only a small minority of trial reports are being analysed in up-to-date systematic reviews. Given the constraints, Archie Cochrane's vision will not be achieved without some serious changes in course.To meet the needs of patients, clinicians, and policymakers, unnecessary trials need to be reduced, and systematic reviews need to be prioritised. Streamlining and innovation in methods of systematic reviewing are necessary to enable valid answers to be found for most patient questions. Finally, clinicians and patients require open access to these important resources.",
author = "Hilda Bastian and Paul Glasziou and Iain Chalmers",
year = "2010",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
journal = "PLoS Medicine",
issn = "1549-1277",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "9",

}

Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day : How will we ever keep up? / Bastian, Hilda; Glasziou, Paul; Chalmers, Iain.

In: PLoS Medicine, Vol. 7, No. 9, e1000326, 09.2010.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day

T2 - How will we ever keep up?

AU - Bastian, Hilda

AU - Glasziou, Paul

AU - Chalmers, Iain

PY - 2010/9

Y1 - 2010/9

N2 - Summary PointsWhen Archie Cochrane reproached the medical profession for not having critical summaries of all randomised controlled trials, about 14 reports of trials were being published per day. There are now 75 trials, and 11 systematic reviews of trials, per day and a plateau in growth has not yet been reached.Although trials, reviews, and health technology assessments have undoubtedly had major impacts, the staple of medical literature synthesis remains the non-systematic narrative review. Only a small minority of trial reports are being analysed in up-to-date systematic reviews. Given the constraints, Archie Cochrane's vision will not be achieved without some serious changes in course.To meet the needs of patients, clinicians, and policymakers, unnecessary trials need to be reduced, and systematic reviews need to be prioritised. Streamlining and innovation in methods of systematic reviewing are necessary to enable valid answers to be found for most patient questions. Finally, clinicians and patients require open access to these important resources.

AB - Summary PointsWhen Archie Cochrane reproached the medical profession for not having critical summaries of all randomised controlled trials, about 14 reports of trials were being published per day. There are now 75 trials, and 11 systematic reviews of trials, per day and a plateau in growth has not yet been reached.Although trials, reviews, and health technology assessments have undoubtedly had major impacts, the staple of medical literature synthesis remains the non-systematic narrative review. Only a small minority of trial reports are being analysed in up-to-date systematic reviews. Given the constraints, Archie Cochrane's vision will not be achieved without some serious changes in course.To meet the needs of patients, clinicians, and policymakers, unnecessary trials need to be reduced, and systematic reviews need to be prioritised. Streamlining and innovation in methods of systematic reviewing are necessary to enable valid answers to be found for most patient questions. Finally, clinicians and patients require open access to these important resources.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957859521&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326

DO - 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326

M3 - Article

VL - 7

JO - PLoS Medicine

JF - PLoS Medicine

SN - 1549-1277

IS - 9

M1 - e1000326

ER -