The knowledge system underpinning healthcare is not fit for purpose and must change

The medical literature is biased and inundated with poor quality trials. Ian Roberts and colleagues explain how these problems affect systematic reviews and how they might be overcome

[1]  J. Treasure,et al.  A randomised controlled trial of cognitive behaviour therapy and motivational interviewing for people with Type 1 diabetes mellitus with persistent sub-optimal glycaemic control: a Diabetes and Psychological Therapies (ADaPT) study. , 2010, Health technology assessment.

[2]  Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors , 2004, The Lancet.

[3]  D G Altman,et al.  The scandal of poor medical research , 1994, BMJ.

[4]  David A. Fleming,et al.  Ethics of parsimonious medicine. , 2013, JAMA.

[5]  K. Thorlund,et al.  Trial sequential analysis reveals insufficient information size and potentially false positive results in many meta-analyses. , 2008, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[6]  Peter Williams,et al.  “Hardly worth the effort”? Medical journals’ policies and their editors’ and publishers’ views on trial registration and publication bias: quantitative and qualitative study , 2013, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[7]  Trish Groves,et al.  Registration of observational studies , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[8]  I Chalmers,et al.  Underreporting research is scientific misconduct. , 1990, JAMA.

[9]  P. Alderson,et al.  Colloid solutions for fluid resuscitation. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[10]  John Hoey,et al.  Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. , 2004, JAMA.

[11]  H. Bastian,et al.  Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up? , 2010, PLoS medicine.

[12]  F. Song,et al.  Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases. , 2010, Health technology assessment.

[13]  Douglas G Altman,et al.  The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  Dean A Fergusson,et al.  Association of hydroxyethyl starch administration with mortality and acute kidney injury in critically ill patients requiring volume resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2013, JAMA.

[15]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis , 2014, The Lancet.

[16]  J. Ioannidis.  Meta-analyses of hydroxyethyl starch for volume resuscitation. , 2013, JAMA.

[17]  F. McAlister,et al.  Random error in cardiovascular meta-analyses: how common are false positive and false negative results? , 2013, International journal of cardiology.

[18]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Scientific inbreeding and same-team replication: type D personality as an example. , 2012, Journal of psychosomatic research.

[19]  R. Simes.  Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials. , 1986, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[20]  Kristian Thorlund,et al.  The Number of Patients and Events Required to Limit the Risk of Overestimation of Intervention Effects in Meta-Analysis—A Simulation Study , 2011, PloS one.

[21]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  Research: increasing value, reducing waste 2 , 2014 .

[22]  P. Perel,et al.  Colloids versus crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill patients. , 2013, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[23]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Overcoming the limitations of current meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials , 1998, The Lancet.

[24]  Kristian Thorlund,et al.  Apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be inconclusive--Trial sequential analysis adjustment of random error risk due to repetitive testing of accumulating data in apparently conclusive neonatal meta-analyses. , 2009, International journal of epidemiology.

[25]  S. Evans,et al.  Doubts over head injury studies , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[26]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Cumulating evidence from randomized trials: utilizing sequential monitoring boundaries for cumulative meta-analysis. , 1997, Controlled clinical trials.