Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 480

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systematic Reviews: Checklists for review articles

Open access
Oxman, A D·1994·BMJ
DOI 10.1136/bmj.309.6955.648
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Preparing a review entails many judgments. The focus of the review must be decided. Studies that are relevant to the focus of the review must be identified, selected for inclusion and critically appraised. Information must be collected and synthesised from the relevant studies, and conclusions must be drawn. Checklists can help prevent important errors in this process. Reviewers, editors, content experts, and users of reviews all have a role to play in improving the quality of published reviews and promoting the appropriate use of reviews by decisionmakers. It is essential that both providers and users appraise the validity of review articles.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.309.6955.648

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. 10.1001/jama.1992.03490020088036 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Altman, 1992, Confidence intervals in research evaluation., Ann Interen Med, 116, A28
  3. 10.2307/1170440 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Cooper, 1982, Scientific guidelines for conducting integrative research reviews., Review of Education Research, 52, 291, 10.3102/00346543052002291 · doi:10.3102/00346543052002291 · Paper page
  5. Light RJ Pillemer DB .Summing up: the science of reviewing research.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1984:160–73. · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1056/NEJM198702193160806 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Oxman, 1988, Guidelines for reading literature reviews., Can Med Assoc J, 138, 697
  8. Oxman AD Cook DJ Guyatt GH .Users' guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. JAMA (in press).
  9. Ysuf, 1987, Stat Med, 6, 217, 10.1002/sim.4780060302 · doi:10.1002/sim.4780060302
  10. Detsky, 1992, Incorporating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis., J Clin Epidemiol, 45, 255, 10.1016/0895-4356(92)90085-2 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Fletcher, 1979, Clinical research in general medical journals: a 30 year persective., N Engl J Med, 301, 180, 10.1056/NEJM197907263010403 · DOI
  12. 10.1016/0197-2456(89)90017-2 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1016/0197-2456(90)90175-2 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Emerson, 1990, An empirical study of the possible relation of treatment differences to quality scores in controlled randomized clinical trials., Control Clin Trials, 11, 339, 10.1016/0197-2456(90)90175-2 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Laird, 1990, Some statistical methods for combining experimental results., Int J Technology Assess Health Care, 6, 5, 10.1017/S0266462300008916 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1001/jama.1990.03440030128037 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Eddy, 1990, Anatomy of a decision., JAMA, 263, 441, 10.1001/jama.1990.03440030128037 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Grady, 1992, Hormone therapy to prevent disease and prolong life in postmenopausal women., Ann Intern Med, 117, 1016, 10.7326/0003-4819-117-12-1016 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Ysuf, 1991, Analysis and interpretation of treatment effects in subgroups of patients in randomized clinical trials., JAMA, 266, 93, 10.1001/jama.1991.03470010097038 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Oxman, 1992, A consumer's guide to subgroup analyses., Ann Intern Med, 116, 78, 10.7326/0003-4819-116-1-78 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Cooper HM .On the social psychology of using research review: the case of desegregation and the black achiever.In: Feldman RS ed.Social psychology of education.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1986:341–63.
  22. 10.1001/jama.1992.03490170092032 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1001/jama.1993.03510170086037 · DOI
  24. 10.1001/jama.1993.03510170083036 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Oxman, 1993, Users' guides to the medical literature. I. How to get started., JAMA, 270, 2093, 10.1001/jama.1993.03510170083036 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Oxman, A. D.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1994-09-10
Volume
309
Issue
6955
Pages
648-651
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
DOI
10.1136/bmj.309.6955.648
OpenAlex
W2027485366
Cited by
480
References
4
FWCI
2.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.