November 2017

Editorial Board
Published in issue: November 2017
IFC

Table of Contents
Published in issue: November 2017
iii-v

Editorial

Current study design labels are confusing! Call for consensus on better terminology that clearly reflects specific features
• Peter Tugwell,
• J. André Knottnerus
Published in issue: November 2017
p1-3

Commentary

If there is only one author or only one database was searched, a study should not be called a systematic review
• Livia Puljak
Published online: August 17, 2017
p4-5

Series: Pragmatic Trials and Real World Evidence

Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 7. Safety, quality and monitoring
• Elaine Irving,
• Rutger van den Bor,
• Paco Welsing,
• ...
• Nadia Garman,
• Diederick E. Grobbee
• on behalf of GetReal Work Package 3
Published online: May 11, 2017
p6-12
Open Access

Series: Pragmatic trials and real world evidence: Paper 8. Data collection and management
• Anna-Katharina Meinecke,
• Paco Welsing,
• George Kafatos,
• ...
• Matthias Egger,
• Mira Zuidgeest
• on behalf of work package 3 of the GetReal consortium
Published online: July 14, 2017
p13-22
Open Access

Series: Living Systematic Reviews

Living systematic review: 1. Introduction—the why, what, when, and how
• Julian H. Elliott,
• Anneliese Synnot,
• Tari Turner,
• ...
• Ian Shemilt,
• James Thomas
• on behalf of the Living Systematic Review Network
Published online: September 10, 2017
p23-30

Living systematic reviews: 2. Combining human and machine effort
• James Thomas,
• Anna Noel-Storr,
• Iain Marshall,
• ...
• Tari Turner,
• Julian Elliott
• on behalf of the Living Systematic Review Network
Published online: September 10, 2017
p31-37
Open Access

Living systematic reviews: 3. Statistical methods for updating meta-analyses
• Mark Simmonds,
• Georgia Salanti,
• Joanne McKenzie,
• Julian Elliott
• On behalf of the Living Systematic Review Network
Published online: September 10, 2017
p38-46

Living systematic reviews: 4. Living guideline recommendations
• Elie A. Akl,
• Joerg J. Meerpohl,
• Julian Elliott,
• Lara A. Kahale,
• Holger J. Schünemann
• on behalf of the Living Systematic Review Network
Published online: September 10, 2017
p47-53
Not enough I say! Expand the remit of living systematic reviews to inform future research
• Alex J. Sutton
Published online: September 10, 2017
p54-55

Reviews

Heterogeneity in application, design, and analysis characteristics was found for controlled before-after and interrupted time series studies included in Cochrane reviews
• Stephanie Polus,
• Dawid Pieper,
• Jacob Burns,
• ...
• Tim Mathes,
• Lisa M. Pfadenhauer,
• Eva A. Rehfuess
Published online: July 24, 2017
p56-69

Congruence between patient characteristics and interventions may partly explain medication adherence intervention effectiveness: an analysis of 190 randomized controlled trials from a Cochrane systematic review
• Samuel S. Allemann,
• Robby Nieuwlaat,
• Tamara Navarro,
• Brian Haynes,
• Kurt E. Hersberger,
• Isabelle Arnet
Published online: August 09, 2017
p70-79

A systematic review finds underreporting of ethics approval, informed consent, and incentives in clinical trials
• Ly Quoc Trung,
• Mostafa Ebraheem Morra,
• Nguyen Duc Truong,
• ...
• Kenji Hirayama,
• Juntra Karbwang,
• Nguyen Tien Huy
Published online: August 30, 2017
p80-86

Comparison between publicly accessible publications, registries, and protocols of phase III trials indicated persistence of selective outcome reporting
• Sheng Zhang,
• Fei Liang,
• Wenfeng Li
Published online: July 28, 2017
p87-94

Cherry-picking by trialists and meta-analysts can drive conclusions about intervention efficacy
• Evan Mayo-Wilson,
• Tianjing Li,
• Nicole Fusco,
• ...
• Claire Twose,
• Swaroop Vedula,
• Kay Dickersin
Published online: August 22, 2017
p95-110
Open Access

Existing reporting guidelines for clinical trials are not completely relevant for implantable medical devices: a systematic review
• Anne-France Motte,
• Stéphanie Diallo,
• Hélène van den Brink,
• ...
• Isabelle Borget,
• Brigitte Bonan,
• Nicolas Martelli
Published online: July 17, 2017
p111-120

The risk of bias in systematic reviews tool showed fair reliability and good construct validity
• Stefanie Bühn,
• Tim Mathes,
• Peggy Prengel,
• ...
• Thomas Ostermann,
• Sibylle Robens,
• Dawid Pieper
Published online: July 07, 2017
p121-128

Original Articles

The Yusuf-Peto method was not a robust method for meta-analyses of rare events data from antidepressant trials
• Tarang Sharma,
• Peter C. Gøtzsche,
• Oliver Kuss
Published online: August 09, 2017
p129-136
Repeatedly measured material and behavioral factors changed the explanation of socioeconomic inequalities in all-cause mortality
• Joost Oude Groeniger,
• Carlijn B. Kamphuis,
• Johan P. Mackenbach,
• Frank J. van Lenthe
Published online: August 28, 2017
p137-145

Letters to the Editor

Quasi-experimental study designs: making a case for non-experimental designs in the spectrum
• Anke Richters,
• René J.F. Melis
Published online: August 09, 2017
p146
Instrumental variable meta-analysis Comment on: Adjustment for compliance behavior in trials of epidural analgesia in labor using instrumental variable meta-analysis
• Stuart G. Baker,
• Karen S. Lindeman
Published online: August 09, 2017
p146-147