Institution
Cochrane Collaboration
Nonprofit•Oxford, United Kingdom•
About: Cochrane Collaboration is a nonprofit organization based out in Oxford, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Systematic review & Randomized controlled trial. The organization has 1995 authors who have published 3928 publications receiving 382695 citations.
Topics: Systematic review, Randomized controlled trial, Cochrane Library, Clinical trial, Population
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: This debate examines how best to tackle ghostwriting in the medical literature from the perspectives of a researcher, an editor, and the professional medical writer.
Abstract: Background to the debate: Ghostwriting occurs when someone makes substantial contributions to a manuscript without attribution or disclosure. It is considered bad publication practice in the medical sciences, and some argue it is scientific misconduct. At its extreme, medical ghostwriting involves pharmaceutical companies hiring professional writers to produce papers promoting their products but hiding those contributions and instead naming academic physicians or scientists as the authors. To improve transparency, many editors' associations and journals allow professional medical writers to contribute to the writing of papers without being listed as authors provided their role is acknowledged. This debate examines how best to tackle ghostwriting in the medical literature from the perspectives of a researcher, an editor, and the professional medical writer.
99 citations
••
TL;DR: This investigation shows the variation in the searching element of systematic reviews of adverse effects and demonstrates that the reporting of the methods used to identify research in such reviews could be vastly improved.
99 citations
••
TL;DR: A comprehensive review of anticoagulation treatment in patients with cancer, with particular focus on studies that included patients with advanced disease, suggests long-term full-dose low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is more effective than warfarin in the secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism.
Abstract: Venous thromboembolism is common in patients with cancer. However, no management guidelines exist for venous thromboembolism specific to patients with advanced progressive cancer. To help develop recommendations for practice, we have done a comprehensive review of anticoagulation treatment in patients with cancer, with particular focus on studies that included patients with advanced disease. Data from 19 publications, including randomised, prospective, and retrospective studies suggest that: long-term full-dose low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is more effective than warfarin in the secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer of any stage, performance status, or prognosis; warfarin should not be used in patients with advancing progressive disease; and in patients at high risk of bleeding, full-dose LMWH for 7 days followed by a long-term decreased fixed dose long term can be considered. The optimum treatment duration is unclear, but because the prothrombotic tendency will persist in patients with advanced cancer, indefinite treatment is generally recommended. For patients with contraindications to anticoagulation, inferior-vena-caval filters can be considered, but their use needs careful patient selection. Ultimately, the decision to initiate, continue, and stop anticoagulation will need to be made on an individual basis, guided by the available evidence, the patient's circumstances, and their informed preferences.
98 citations
••
TL;DR: The results indicated that a significant proportion of patients with microfocal cancer, regardless of how it was defined, had adverse pathologic findings and a significant risk of PSA recurrence after undergoing radical prostatectomy.
Abstract: Clinically localized prostate cancer is associated with a wide variation in biologic behavior, and men with the less aggressive form of the disease may never develop symptoms. There has been a rise in prostate cancer incidence in countries in which the blood test for prostatic-specific antigen (PSA) is common, and concerns have been expressed that this may be because of the increased detection of indolent disease, subjecting these men to unnecessary treatment and associated side effects. For the current review, the authors conducted a systematic evaluation of the literature regarding the outcomes of men who were diagnosed on the basis of a small volume of cancer in prostatic biopsies. The results indicated that, despite differences in study design and reporting, a significant proportion of patients with microfocal cancer, regardless of how it was defined, had adverse pathologic findings and a significant risk of PSA recurrence after undergoing radical prostatectomy. Biochemical and clinical recurrences also were observed after radiotherapy or watchful waiting. The authors concluded that patients with microfocal carcinoma on biopsy should be advised that their disease is not necessarily "insignificant" and should be counseled accordingly.
98 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article, a systematic review of the evidence for efficacy of GTR for infrabony defects is presented, where the authors search for randomised controlled trials of at least 12 months' follow-up comparing GTR with open flap debridement.
Abstract: Objectives: To systematically review the evidence for efficacy of guided tissue regeneration (GTR) for infrabony defects.
Background: The evidence for the efficacy of GTR has not yet been systematically appraised.
Methods: We searched for randomised controlled trials of at least 12 months' follow-up comparing GTR with open flap debridement (OFD). Data sources included electronic databases, hand-searched journals and contact with experts. Screening, data abstraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by multiple reviewers. The primary outcome measure was gain in clinical attachment.
Results: For attachment level change, the weighted mean difference between GTR alone and open flap debridement was 1.11 mm (95% CI: 0.63–1.59), chi-square for heterogeneity 31.4 (9 df ), P < 0.001) and for GTR + bone substitutes was 1.25 mm (95% CI: 0.89–1.61, chi-square for heterogeneity 0.01 (1 df), P = 0.91). The number of sites needed to treat (NNT) for GTR to achieve one extra site gaining 2 mm or more attachment over open flap debridement was 8 (95% CI: 4–33). Heterogeneity between studies was highly statistically significant for all principal comparisons and could not be explained satisfactorily by sensitivity analyses.
Conclusions: Overall, GTR was more effective than OFD in improving attachment levels. However, there was marked variability between studies and general conclusions about the clinical benefit of GTR are limited by this heterogeneity. Future studies should aim to identify factors associated with achieving consistent benefits over open flap debridement. Open flap surgery should remain the control comparison in these studies.
98 citations
Authors
Showing all 2000 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Douglas G. Altman | 253 | 1001 | 680344 |
John P. A. Ioannidis | 185 | 1311 | 193612 |
Jasvinder A. Singh | 176 | 2382 | 223370 |
George A. Wells | 149 | 941 | 114256 |
Shah Ebrahim | 146 | 733 | 96807 |
Holger J. Schünemann | 141 | 810 | 113169 |
Paul G. Shekelle | 132 | 601 | 101639 |
Peter Tugwell | 129 | 948 | 125480 |
Jeremy M. Grimshaw | 123 | 691 | 115126 |
Peter Jüni | 121 | 593 | 99254 |
John J. McGrath | 120 | 791 | 124804 |
Arne Astrup | 114 | 866 | 68877 |
Mike Clarke | 113 | 1037 | 164328 |
Rachelle Buchbinder | 112 | 613 | 94973 |
Ian Roberts | 112 | 714 | 51933 |