Assessing Authority

At the beginning of the 1990s, Antman and a team led by Tom Chalmers and Fred Mosteller used retrospective cumulative meta-analysis to show that the treatment recommendations of authorities in review articles and textbook chapters published over the previous 30 years had not reflected the best conte...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association 2009-05, Vol.301 (17), p.1819-1821
Main Authors: Rennie, Drummond, Chalmers, Iain
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Chalmers
Discourse analysis
History, 20th Century
Humans
Medical treatment
Meta-analysis
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Myocardial Infarction - history
Myocardial Infarction - therapy
Patient safety
Periodicals as Topic - history
Physicians
Review Literature as Topic
Thomas Chalmers
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:At the beginning of the 1990s, Antman and a team led by Tom Chalmers and Fred Mosteller used retrospective cumulative meta-analysis to show that the treatment recommendations of authorities in review articles and textbook chapters published over the previous 30 years had not reflected the best contemporary research evidence. These gaps between evidence and advice, which had sometimes lasted more than a decade, meant that both effective and dangerous treatments had been overlooked. The article by Antman et al published in JAMA in 1992 provided powerful evidence that traditional, unsystematic, narrative reviews did not serve patients well, and that better systems for gathering, analyzing, and disseminating clinical information were urgently required.See PDF for full text of the original JAMA article.
ISSN:0098-7484
1538-3598
DOI:10.1001/jama.2009.559