What is the point of databases of reviews for dermatology if all they compile is "insufficient evidence"?

BACKGROUND The use of review databases for dermatology has been questioned because of the impression that these reviews frequently report finding insufficient evidence to guide therapeutic recommendations. OBJECTIVE We sought to determine the number of review database entries most relevant to dermatology (addressing diseases with skin manifestations whereby a dermatologist may be the primary caregiver) and the percentage of these entries that report sufficient evidence to guide clinical decision making. METHODS We conducted computerized searches and analysis of reviews in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness. Database entries were categorized using the face value reports of the original reviewers as: (1) finding sufficient evidence to inform clinical decisions; (2) finding insufficient evidence; or (3) unable to classify with regard to degree of evidence found. RESULTS Of all review database entries, 3% (54/1235 in Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and 65/2208 in the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness) were deemed relevant to dermatology. In all, 14 entries from the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness were in the process of being written and not available for further evaluation. Of the remaining entries, 40% (42/105) reported finding sufficient evidence. Of the 10 most common dermatologic diagnoses, 8 were addressed in 30% (31/105) of these reviews. Of entries addressing common dermatologic diagnoses, 32% (10/31) reported finding sufficient evidence. CONCLUSIONS Although few (3%) entries in review databases currently address dermatology topics, entries address many (8/10) of the top 10 dermatology diagnoses. Contrary to popular belief, a substantial number (40%) of such reviews report sufficient evidence to inform clinical decisions making.

[1]  M. Bigby.  Evidence-based medicine in dermatology. , 2000, Dermatologic clinics.

[2]  Bernard R. Rosner,et al.  Fundamentals of Biostatistics. , 1992 .

[3]  A R Jadad,et al.  Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals. , 1998, JAMA.

[4]  H. Williams,et al.  Dowling Oration 2001Evidence‐based dermatology − a bridge too far? , 2001 .

[5]  S. Feldman,et al.  Most common dermatologic problems identified by internists, 1990-1994. , 1998, Archives of internal medicine.

[6]  J. Rees,et al.  Evidence-based medicine: the epistemology that isn't. , 2000, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[7]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: IX. A Method for Grading Health Care Recommendations , 1995 .

[8]  Fujian Song,et al.  Quality of Cochrane reviews , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  L. Naldi,et al.  The Cochrane Skin Group: Preparing, Maintaining, and Disseminating Systematic Reviews of Clinical Interventions in Dermatology , 1998 .

[10]  M. Swartz,et al.  Teaching evidence‐based medicine skills to medical students and residents , 1999, International journal of dermatology.

[11]  H. Williams,et al.  How can hand searching the dermatological literature benefit people with skin problems? , 2001, Archives of dermatology.

[12]  R. Dellavalle,et al.  Assessing evidence-based dermatology and evidence-based internal medicine curricula in US residency training programs: a national survey. , 2003, Archives of dermatology.

[13]  C. Mulrow,et al.  Systematic Reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews , 1994, BMJ.

[14]  S. Gibbs.  Losing touch with the healing art: dermatology and the decline of pastoral doctoring. , 2000, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[15]  M. Bigby,et al.  Evidence-based medicine in a nutshell. A guide to finding and using the best evidence in caring for patients. , 1998, Archives of dermatology.

[16]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature. , 1993, JAMA.

[17]  P Middleton,et al.  Quality of Cochrane reviews: assessment of sample from 1998 , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[18]  D G Altman,et al.  Statistics notes: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence , 1995 .

[19]  Berry Cc.  The kappa statistic. , 1992, JAMA.

[20]  D. Sackett,et al.  Bringing evidence to the clinic. , 1998, Archives of dermatology.