The usefulness and interpretation of systematic reviews

  • Smith K
  • Cipriani A
  • Geddes J
7Citations
Citations of this article
35Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Keeping up to date with the best evidence on treatment interventions is an essential part of clinical practice, but it can seem an overwhelming task for busy clinicians. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses provide a useful and convenient summary of knowledge and form an essential part of an evidence-based approach to clinical practice. However, these reviews vary in methodology and therefore in the quality of the recommendations they provide. Clinicians need to feel confident in their skills of critical appraisal, so that they can assess the relative merits of systematic reviews. In this article we discuss the strengths and limitations of different types of evidence synthesis to enable the reader to feel more confident in assessing the scientific information to use in clinical practice.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Smith, K. A., Cipriani, A., & Geddes, J. R. (2016). The usefulness and interpretation of systematic reviews. BJPsych Advances, 22(2), 132–141. https://doi.org/10.1192/apt.bp.114.013128

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free