Detecting the effects of thromboprophylaxis: the case of the rogue reviews

摘要

Holmes and Watson are visited by an exasperated Professor Legge. Thumping a large pile of meta-analyses on the table, Legge explains that he's been trying to get straight answers on effective surgical thromboprophylaxis-without success. Over tea Holmes dissects Legge's problem: the principal difficulty, he asserts, lies in too much evidence. The vital evidence is obscured by erroneous information-caused on this occasion by flawed methods. After contemplating the evidence Holmes concludes that mechanical methods are the answer to preventing deep vein thrombosis and that a comprehensive literature search, explicit inclusion criteria, detailed assessment of quality of studies, and appropriate methods of pooling the data are the key to a good review.