Evaluating the Usefulness of Systematic Reviews in Palliative Care
Author Information
Author(s): Wee Bee, Hadley Gina, Derry Sheena
Primary Institution: Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals, University of Oxford
Hypothesis
How useful are systematic reviews for informing palliative care practice?
Conclusion
Cochrane reviews in palliative care are well performed, but fail to provide good evidence for clinical practice due to the poor quality and limited number of primary studies.
Supporting Evidence
- 25 published systematic reviews were identified, but only 2 provided stronger evidence.
- Most reviews had major problems with the primary studies, affecting the conclusions.
- Only five studies were published before 2003, indicating a recent increase in review production.
Takeaway
This study looked at 25 reviews about palliative care and found that while they are done well, they don't give us strong evidence to help patients because the studies they rely on are often too small or not good enough.
Methodology
The study reviewed 25 systematic reviews registered with the Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group, assessing the quality and quantity of primary studies and the review process.
Potential Biases
Many reviews included studies with significant bias due to open or non-blinded designs.
Limitations
The primary studies were few in number, small, clinically heterogeneous, and of poor quality.
Participant Demographics
Eighteen reviews included trials involving only cancer patients, with some including patients with other terminal illnesses.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website