BMJ 2003;327 (8 November), doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7423.0-b
Systematic reviews unevenly cover the global burden of disease
Systematic reviews follow the priorities of rich countries rather than global disease burden. Swingler and colleagues (p 1083) analysed nearly 3000 reviews from the Cochrane database of systematic reviews (CDSR) and the database of abstracts of reviews of effects (DARE), and looked at the correlation between number of reviews and burden of disease. They found that the number of systematic reviews is still small and ignores major diseases affecting large numbers of the world population.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
StumbleUpon 
Technorati What's this?
Relevant Article
- Number of published systematic reviews and global burden of disease: database analysis
- George H Swingler, Jimmy Volmink, and John P A Ioannidis
BMJ 2003 327: 1083-1084.[Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]
This Article
- Respond to this article
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me when responses are posted
- Alert me when a correction is posted
Services
- Email this article to a friend
- Find similar articles in BMJ
- Add article to my folders
- Download to citation manager
- Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
Related Content
Bookmark with
What's new
Latest blogs
Find BMJ on:
Services
Tools
Online poll
Resources
Rapid responses for this article
There are no rapid responses for this article. Print issues
