Overlapping meta-analyses on the same topic: survey of published studies
Open Access
- 19 July 2013
- Vol. 347 (jul19 1), f4501
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f4501
Abstract
Objective To assess how common it is to have multiple overlapping meta-analyses of randomized trials published on the same topic. Design Survey of published meta-analyses. Data sources PubMed. Study selection and methods Meta-analyses published in 2010 were identified, and 5% of them were randomly selected. We further selected those that included randomized trials and examined effectiveness of any medical intervention. For eligible meta-analyses, we searched for other meta-analyses on the same topic (covering the same comparisons, indications/settings, and outcomes or overlapping subsets of them) published until February 2013. Results Of 73 eligible meta-analyses published in 2010, 49 (67%) had at least one other overlapping meta-analysis (median two meta-analyses per topic, interquartile range 1-4, maximum 13). In 17 topics at least one author was involved in at least two of the overlapping meta-analyses. No characteristics of the index meta-analyses were associated with the potential for overlapping meta-analyses. Among pairs of overlapping meta-analyses in 20 randomly selected topics, 13 of the more recent meta-analyses did not include any additional outcomes. In three of the four topics with eight or more published meta-analyses, many meta-analyses examined only a subset of the eligible interventions or indications/settings covered by the index meta-analysis. Conversely, for statins in the prevention of atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery, 11 meta-analyses were published with similar eligibility criteria for interventions and setting: there was still variability on which studies were included, but the results were always similar or even identical across meta-analyses. Conclusions While some independent replication of meta-analyses by different teams is possibly useful, the overall picture suggests that there is a waste of efforts with many topics covered by multiple overlapping meta-analyses.This publication has 35 references indexed in Scilit:
- Can a core outcome set improve the quality of systematic reviews? – a survey of the Co-ordinating Editors of Cochrane review groupsTrials, 2013
- Primary study authors of significant studies are more likely to believe that a strong association exists in a heterogeneous meta-analysis compared with methodologistsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2012
- An international registry of systematic-review protocolsThe Lancet, 2011
- Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up?PLoS Medicine, 2010
- Updating Systematic Reviews: An International SurveyPLOS ONE, 2010
- Same trials, different conclusions: sorting out discrepancies between reviews on interventional procedures of the spineThe Spine Journal, 2009
- Integration of evidence from multiple meta-analyses: a primer on umbrella reviews, treatment networks and multiple treatments meta-analysesCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association Journal, 2009
- Disagreement in primary study selection between systematic reviews on negative pressure wound therapyBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2008
- The interpretation of systematic reviews with meta-analyses: an objective or subjective process?BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 2008
- Epidemiology and Reporting Characteristics of Systematic ReviewsPLoS Medicine, 2007