I wonder what it is in #Orthopedic #Surgery ? Check out a few of our related @ArthroscopyJ papers - great resources for systematic reviews!!! https://t.co/brP56E1SJP https://t.co/5D0Hs6NCNI https://t.co/jkJM6c83Nr https://t.co/BTFo5x9aFW
@dnunan79 @raj_mehta @NEJM I thought @NEJM did not publish SRs? Eg https://t.co/6kL9a2Jvkz (Annals is good but closed and notorious to access. Why not @PLOSMedicine or some such?) https://t.co/yzp9qwvppC
How does this make sense? Nearly 75% narrative reviews. Prepping my dissertation-SR/MAnlys of Autism in Epilepsy for pub. Many journals say SR/MA not original work/ don’t accept but take narrative reviews. Poor practice prioritizing opinion over evidence!
Sólo el 27% de las revisiones publicadas en las 5 Top revistas médicas son sistemáticas, el 27% son "no-sistemáticas" y el 46% son narrativas pero describen el método de búsqueda. En: https://t.co/XlaUnEHkX3 #bmcmedresmethodol
RT @pash22: Non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in the five highest-ranked general medical…
RT @pash22: Non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in the five highest-ranked general medical…
RT @CADTH_ACMTS: Study in @BioMedCentral finds that non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in…
RT @CADTH_ACMTS: Study in @BioMedCentral finds that non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in…
RT @CADTH_ACMTS: Study in @BioMedCentral finds that non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in…
Study in @BioMedCentral finds that non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in the 5 highest-ranked general medical journals. https://t.co/StxkopHgAb
RT @pash22: Non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in the five highest-ranked general medical…
RT @pash22: Non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in the five highest-ranked general medical…
RT @pash22: Non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in the five highest-ranked general medical…
RT @pash22: Non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in the five highest-ranked general medical…
RT @pash22: Non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in the five highest-ranked general medical…
Non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in the five highest-ranked general medical journals ie @TheLancet @bmj_latest @AnnalsofIM @JAMAInternalMed & @NEJM https://t.co/W3NcTcdAA3
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
Research examines the prevalence of narrative and systematic reviews in major medical journals: https://t.co/ziSxZbGQrB
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @CODINUCyL: * A survey of prevalence of narrative and systematic reviews in five major medical journals --> https://t.co/Tsn9yv5Ne7
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
* A survey of prevalence of narrative and systematic reviews in five major medical journals --> https://t.co/Tsn9yv5Ne7
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @laikas: Note that none of the NEJM reviews are systematic. https://t.co/d4ydCXIdeO
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @pash22: Non-systematic evidence is the most prevalent type of evidence in reviews published in the five highest-ranked general medical…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
A survey of prevalence of narrative and systematic reviews in five major medical journals Background -... https://t.co/2QGZSVAbRG
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
ICYMI https://t.co/6R05nieuUl
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
RT @rincondesisifo: Cosas a tener en cuenta antes de decir eso de "hay una revisión que..." https://t.co/59GpqVC2sw
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
Meanwhile, elsewhere... https://t.co/QX6iaX4jKD
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
Even high IF journal as Nejm publish non-systematic reviews. Worrying. https://t.co/2FGDbFNgjD
RT @PaulGlasziou: A mix of types seems reasonable, but NEJM is 100% narrative reviews!? https://t.co/gJnLppNfwb
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @HeatherM211: Ouch https://t.co/w5yv1y47p4
RT @InfoPhysioPT: Who would have guessed? 🤔👇🏻 https://t.co/zknbDGdtk1
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @hildabast: Only 27% of the reviews in the "top 5" medical journals are systematic: another 27% are "non-systematic" & 46% are narrative…
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…
RT @First10EM: This graph helps explain why the @NEJM is among my least trusted journals. Prestige, not science. https://t.co/KsogUMutOj
RT @laikas: Note that none of the NEJM reviews are systematic. https://t.co/d4ydCXIdeO
RT @Cartabellotta: #EBM: too many narrative reviews, too little systematic reviews @PaulGlasziou @dmoher @pash22 @ajburls @BMJ_CE @bengolda…