The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparison of Results of Meta-analyses of Randomized Control Trials and Recommendations of Clinical Experts: Treatments for Myocardial Infarction
Abstract
Objective. —To examine the temporal relationship between accumulating data from randomized control trials of treatments for myocardial infarction and the recommendations of clinical experts writing review articles and textbook chapters. Data Sources. —(1) MEDLINE search from 1966 to present; search terms used weremyocardial infarction, clinical trials, multicenter studies, double-blind method, meta-analysis, and the text word "random:"; (2) references from pertinent articles and books; and (3) all editions of English-language general medical texts and manuals and review articles on treatment of myocardial infarction. Study Selection. —Randomized control trials of therapies for reducing the risk of total mortality in myocardial infarction (acute and secondary prevention). Review articles and textbook chapters dealing with the general clinical management of patients with myocardial infarction. Data Extraction. —Two authors read the material and recorded the results; disagreements were resolved by conference. Data Synthesis. —We used the technique of cumulative meta-analysis (performing a new meta-analysis when the results of a new clinical trial are published) and compared the results with the recommendations of the experts for various treatments for myocardial infarction. Discrepancies were detected between the meta-analytic patterns of effectiveness in the randomized trials and the recommendations of reviewers. Review articles often failed to mention important advances or exhibited delays in recommending effective preventive measures. In some cases, treatments that have no effect on mortality or are potentially harmful continued to be recommended by several clinical experts. Conclusions. —Finding and analyzing all therapeutic trials in a given field has become such a difficult and specialized task that the clinical experts called on to summarize the evidence in a timely fashion need access to better databases and new statistical techniques to assist them in this important task. (JAMA. 1992;268:240-248)
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“When the procedure is done properly and has the minimal error, the study can provide reliable findings and reliable conclusion that could help decision-makers and scientific practitioners to act accordingly [[2], [3], [4]].”
From Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental science research (2020) · cites this paper as [2]
Citations
Cites
Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trials
Yusuf, S., Peto, R., Lewis, J., Collins, R., & Sleight, P. (1985) · Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases · doi:10.1016/s0033-0620(85)80003-7 · Cited by 3,205
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework
Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005) · International Journal of Social Research Methodology · doi:10.1080/1364557032000119616 · Cited by 36,742
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 · Cited by 28,164
PRISMA-P Group, Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., & Stewart, L. A. (2015) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 · Cited by 26,223
“When done well, this provides reliable findings from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made [25,26].”
BackgroundGRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G. E., Kunz, R., Falck-Ytter, Y., Alonso-Coello, P., & Schünemann, H. J. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.ad · Cited by 23,305
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2700 · Cited by 17,648
Shamseer, L., Moher, D., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., & the PRISMA-P Group (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g7647 · Cited by 13,120
Wan, X., Wang, W., Liu, J., & Tong, T. (2014) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-135 · Cited by 11,735
“For instance, Antman et al. (1992) pointed out that systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized control trials would have led to earlier recognition of the benefits of thrombolytic therapy for myocardial infarction and may save a large number of patients.”
BackgroundWhy Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 · Cited by 10,505
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006 · Cited by 10,578
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136 · Cited by 10,349
The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States
McGlynn, E. A., Asch, S. M., Adams, J., Keesey, J., Hicks, J., DeCristofaro, A., & Kerr, E. A. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa022615 · Cited by 5,079
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Italian Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2427/5768 · Cited by 3,374
The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research
Morris, Z. S., Wooding, S., & Grant, J. (2011) · Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · doi:10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180 · Cited by 3,340
Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Clinical Decisions
Cook, D. J., Mulrow, C. D., & Haynes, R. B. (1997) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-126-5-199703010-00006 · Cited by 2,184
The need for evidence-based conservation
Sutherland, W. J., Pullin, A. S., Dolman, P. M., & Knight, T. M. (2004) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.018 · Cited by 1,822
Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews
Mulrow, C. D. (1994) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.309.6954.597 · Cited by 1,677
The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses
IOANNIDIS, J. P. A. (2016) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/1468-0009.12210 · Cited by 1,483
Managing Clinical Knowledge for Health Care Improvement
Balas, E. A., & Boren, S. A. (2000) · Yearbook of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1637943 · Cited by 1,479
A scoping review of rapid review methods
Tricco, A. C., Antony, J., Zarin, W., Strifler, L., Ghassemi, M., Ivory, J., Perrier, L., Hutton, B., Moher, D., & Straus, S. E. (2015) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0465-6 · Cited by 1,146
Cumulative Meta-Analysis of Therapeutic Trials for Myocardial Infarction
Lau, J., Antman, E. M., Jimenez-Silva, J., Kupelnick, B., Mosteller, F., & Chalmers, T. C. (1992) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199207233270406 · Cited by 1,140
Self-citationMengist, W., Soromessa, T., & Legese, G. (2020) · MethodsX · doi:10.1016/j.mex.2019.100777 · Cited by 1,110
Brożek, J. L., Akl, E. A., Alonso‐Coello, P., Lang, D., Jaeschke, R., Williams, J. W., Phillips, B., Lelgemann, M., Lethaby, A., Bousquet, J., et al. (2009) · Allergy · doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.2009.01973.x · Cited by 894
How can systematic reviews incorporate qualitative research? A critical perspective
Dixon-Woods, M., Bonas, S., Booth, A., Jones, D. R., Miller, T., Sutton, A. J., Shaw, R. L., Smith, J. A., & Young, B. (2006) · Qualitative Research · doi:10.1177/1468794106058867 · Cited by 860
Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: IX. A Method for Grading Health Care Recommendations
Guyatt, G. H. (1995) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03530220066035 · Cited by 846
Understanding scoping reviews: Definition, purpose, and process
Peterson, J., Pearce, P. F., Ferguson, L. A., & Langford, C. A. (2017) · Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners · doi:10.1002/2327-6924.12380 · Cited by 740
PRISMA for Abstracts: Reporting Systematic Reviews in Journal and Conference Abstracts
Beller, E. M., Glasziou, P. P., Altman, D. G., Hopewell, S., Bastian, H., Chalmers, I., Gøtzsche, P. C., Lasserson, T., Tovey, D., & for the PRISMA for Abstracts Group (2013) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001419 · Cited by 706
Meta-analysis: Potentials and promise
Egger, M., & Smith, G. D. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7119.1371 · Cited by 646
Evaluating meta-ethnography: systematic analysis and synthesis of qualitative research
Campbell, R., Pound, P., Morgan, M., Daker-White, G., Britten, N., Pill, R., Yardley, L., Pope, C., & Donovan, J. (2011) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta15430 · Cited by 619
Publication bias in reports of animal stroke studies leads to major overstatement of efficacy
Sena, E. S., van der Worp, H. B., Bath, P. M. W., Howells, D. W., & Macleod, M. R. (2010) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000344 · Cited by 600
“This is the ‘‘file drawer problem’’ [2,3]: at its most extreme, the 95% of studies that were truly neutral (that is, which reported no significant effects) remain in the files of the investigators, the 5% of experiments that were falsely positive are published, and reviewers conclude—falsely—that the literature repres…”
BackgroundCHALMERS, I. (1993) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb26345.x · Cited by 561
A brief history of research synthesis
Chalmers, I., Hedges, L. V., & Cooper, H. (2002) · Evaluation & the Health Professions · doi:10.1177/0163278702025001003 · Cited by 552
Systematic Reviews from Astronomy to Zoology: Myths and Misconceptions
Petticrew, M. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7278.98 · Cited by 550
Formulating Questions and Locating Primary Studies for Inclusion in Systematic Reviews
Counsell, C. (1997) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-127-5-199709010-00008 · Cited by 505
Egger, M., & Smith, G. D. (1995) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.310.6982.752 · Cited by 508
Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions
Barnes, D. E. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.279.19.1566 · Cited by 442
Pogue, J. M., & Yusuf, S. (1997) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(97)00051-2 · Cited by 415
Woodruff, T. J., & Sutton, P. (2014) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.1307175 · Cited by 427
Kastner, M., Tricco, A. C., Soobiah, C., Lillie, E., Perrier, L., Horsley, T., Welch, V., Cogo, E., Antony, J., & Straus, S. E. (2012) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-12-114 · Cited by 345
“This is an important consideration, given that basing practice and policy decisions on a single study or expert opinion can be misleading [5].”
BackgroundEditorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies
Jefferson, T., Rudin, M., Brodney Folse, S., & Davidoff, F. (2007) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000016.pub3 · Cited by 312
Santesso, N., Akl, E. A., Bianchi, M., Mente, A., Mustafa, R., Heels-Ansdell, D., & Schünemann, H. J. (2012) · European Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1038/ejcn.2012.37 · Cited by 292
Use of evidence in WHO recommendations
Oxman, A. D., Lavis, J. N., & Fretheim, A. (2007) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(07)60675-8 · Cited by 287
Oral hygiene in the prevention of periodontal diseases: the evidence
Van Der Weijden, F., & Slot, D. E. (2011) · Periodontology 2000 · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0757.2009.00337.x · Cited by 291
The relevance of systematic reviews to educational policy and practice
Davies, P. (2000) · Oxford Review of Education · doi:10.1080/713688543 · Cited by 286
A systematic review of non-pharmacological therapies for sleep problems in later life
Montgomery, P. (2004) · Sleep Medicine Reviews · doi:10.1016/s1087-0792(03)00026-1 · Cited by 260
Graphical displays for meta-analysis: An overview with suggestions for practice
Anzures‐Cabrera, J., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2010) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.6 · Cited by 233
Lam, J., Koustas, E., Sutton, P., Johnson, P. I., Atchley, D. S., Sen, S., Robinson, K. A., Axelrad, D. A., & Woodruff, T. J. (2014) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.1307923 · Cited by 214
Ethical issues in stopping randomized trials early because of apparent benefit.
Mueller, P. S., Montori, V. M., Bassler, D., Koenig, B. A., & Guyatt, G. H. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-146-12-200706190-00009 · Cited by 202
Meta-analysis: Unresolved issues and future developments
Smith, G. D., & Egger, M. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7126.221 · Cited by 175
Quality of Cochrane reviews: Assessment of sample from 1998.
Olsen, O., Middleton, P., Ezzo, J., Gøtzsche, P. C., Hadhazy, V., Herxheimer, A., Kleijnen, J., & McIntosh, H. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7317.829 · Cited by 159
Making evidence synthesis more useful for management and policy-making
Sheldon, T. A. (2005) · Journal of Health Services Research & Policy · doi:10.1258/1355819054308521 · Cited by 143
Woodruff, T. J., Sutton, P., & The Navigation Guide Work Group (2011) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2010.1219 · Cited by 134
Hughes-Morley, A., Young, B., Waheed, W., Small, N., & Bower, P. (2015) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2014.10.005 · Cited by 132
Clarke, M., Brice, A., & Chalmers, I. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0102670 · Cited by 120
Systematic reviews and meta-analysis for the surgeon scientist
Mahid, S. S., Hornung, C. A., Minor, K. S., Turina, M., & Galandiuk, S. (2006) · British Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.5596 · Cited by 109
Choice of data extraction tools for systematic reviews depends on resources and review complexity
Elamin, M. B., Flynn, D. N., Bassler, D., Briel, M., Alonso-Coello, P., Karanicolas, P. J., Guyatt, G. H., Malaga, G., Furukawa, T. A., Kunz, R., et al. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.016 · Cited by 88
Quality of systematic reviews in pediatric oncology – A systematic review
Lundh, A., Knijnenburg, S. L., Jørgensen, A. W., van Dalen, E. C., & Kremer, L. C. M. (2009) · Cancer Treatment Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2009.08.010 · Cited by 78
Carney, R. M., Freedland, K. E., Eisen, S. A., Rich, M. W., Skala, J. A., & Jaffe, A. S. (1998) · Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1080/08964289809596379 · Cited by 58
Lilford, R., & Stevens, A. J. (2002) · British journal of surgery · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2168.2002.01989.x · Cited by 31
Multiple systematic reviews: methods for assessing discordances of results
Moja, L., Fernandez del Rio, M. P., Banzi, R., Cusi, C., D’Amico, R., Liberati, A., Lodi, G., Lucenteforte, E., Minozzi, S., Pecoraro, V., et al. (2012) · Internal and Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11739-012-0846-1 · Cited by 27
A Randomized Trial of Evidence-Based Outreach (EBOR)
Freemantle, N., Eccles, M., Wood, J., Mason, J., Nazareth, I., Duggan, C., Young, P., Haines, A., Drummond, M., Russell, I., et al. (1999) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(99)00023-9 · Cited by 25
Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Systemic Hypertension
Garg, J., Messerli, A. W., & Bakris, G. L. (2002) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.0000017143.59204.aa · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Antman, E. M.
- Corresponding author
- Antman, Elliott M.
- ORCID
- Antman, Elliott M.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1992-07-08
- Volume
- 268
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 240
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W7214165250
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- JAMA (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
- Keywords
- myocardial infarction, expert recommendations, cumulative meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials, secondary prevention, mortality reduction, evidence-based medicine, textbook recommendations
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
