How should systematic reviews consider evidence on harms?

Systematic reviews that attempt to assess the risk of harms (adverse effects) associated with specific therapies should consider a broad range of study designs, including both systematic reviews and observational studies. These are the findings of a new study, led by Su Golder of the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, UK published in this week's PLoS Medicine.

There is increasing focus on the importance of using rigorous methods to assess the effectiveness and harms associated with the use of and other therapies, and recognition of the role of systematic reviews in this process. A uses predefined, explicit methods to find and appraise all relevant evidence to answer a specific question in healthcare. However, there has been considerable debate as to whether systematic reviews should use evidence from randomized controlled trials or observational studies (or both) in order to collect all the relevant evidence on risk of harms. Some groups have argued that observational studies may produce biased estimates of harm, while randomized trials may be too small to generate useful data on the risk of rare adverse effects.

In the study, Golder and colleagues identified systematic reviews that had compared the risk of specific harms in evidence from versus the evidence from observational studies. They found that there was no difference on average in the estimates produced by these two approaches. The authors conclude: "Instead of restricting the analysis to certain study designs, it may be preferable for systematic reviewers of to evaluate a broad range of studies that can help build a complete picture of any potential harm and improve the generalisability of the review without loss of validity."

More information: Golder S, Loke YK, Bland M (2011) Meta-analyses of Adverse Effects Data Derived from Randomised Controlled Trials as Compared to Observational Studies: Methodological Overview. PLoS Med 8(5): e1001026. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001026

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

For a less biased study, try randomization

Apr 13, 2011

A new review of existing research confirms that the so-called “gold standard” of medical research — the randomized controlled study — provides a safeguard against bias.

Just how useful are animal studies to human health?

Dec 15, 2006

Animal studies are of limited usefulness to human health because they are of poor quality and their results often conflict with human trials, argue researchers in a study on bmj.com today.

Recommended for you

Hormonal therapy for transsexualism safe and effective

11 hours ago

Hormonal therapy for transsexual patients is safe and effective, a multicenter European study indicates. The results will be presented Saturday at The Endocrine Society's 95th Annual Meeting in San Francisco.

Royalty Pharma lets Elan takeover bid expire

15 hours ago

Royalty Pharma has let its latest takeover bid for Irish drugmaker Elan lapse as it decided against pressing ahead with a court challenge of a requirement that it withdraw the offer.

FDA approves new silicone breast implants

Jun 17, 2013

(HealthDay)—MemoryShape breast implants have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for breast augmentation in women 22 and older, and for breast reconstruction, the FDA said Friday.

User comments

More news stories

Study suggests new approach to fight lung cancer

Recent research has shown that cancer cells have a much different – and more complex – metabolism than normal cells. Now, scientists at The University of Texas at Dallas have found that exploiting these differences might ...

Getting enough sleep could help prevent type 2 diabetes

Men who lose sleep during the work week may be able to lower their risk of developing Type 2 diabetes by getting more hours of sleep, according to Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute (LA BioMed) research findings presented ...

Aspirin may fight cancer by slowing DNA damage

Aspirin is known to lower risk for some cancers, and a new study led by a UC San Francisco scientist points to a possible explanation, with the discovery that aspirin slows the accumulation of DNA mutations in abnormal cells ...