Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The current difficulties in keeping systematic reviews up to date leads to considerable inaccuracy, hampering the translation of knowledge into action. Incremental advances in conventional review updating are unlikely to lead to substantial improvements in review currency. A new approach is needed. We propose living systematic review as a contribution to evidence synthesis that combines currency with rigour to enhance the accuracy and utility of health evidence. Living systematic reviews are high quality, up-to-date online summaries of health research, updated as new research becomes available, and enabled by improved production efficiency and adherence to the norms of scholarly communication. Together with innovations in primary research reporting and the creation and use of evidence in health systems, living systematic review contributes to an emerging evidence ecosystem.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Julian Elliott
Alcatel Lucent (Germany)
Tari Turner
Culham Centre for Fusion Energy
Ornella Clavisi
Australian Institute for Musculoskeletal Science
PLoS Medicine
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
University of Bristol
Monash University
University of London
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Elliott et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/69d9a5ffa1d151c65f684bbe — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001603
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: