Copyright
©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Meta-Anal. Nov 26, 2013; 1(3): 97-101
Published online Nov 26, 2013. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v1.i3.97
Published online Nov 26, 2013. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v1.i3.97
Duplicates in systematic reviews: A critical, but often neglected issue
Xing-Shun Qi, Ming Bai, Zhi-Ping Yang, Wei-Rong Ren, Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi’an 710032, Shaanxi Province, China
Xing-Shun Qi, Department of Gastroenterology, No. 463 Hospital of Chinese PLA, Shenyang 110045, Liaoning Province, China
Author contributions: Qi XS, Bai M, Yang ZP and Ren WR performed the literature search; Qi XS wrote the first draft; Bai M, Yang ZP and Ren WR revised the manuscript.
Correspondence to: Xing-Shun Qi, MD, Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Fourth Military Medical University, No. 27 West Changle Road, Xi’an 710032, Shaanxi Province, China. xingshunqi@126.com
Telephone: +86-29-84771537 Fax: +86-29-82539041
Received: August 27, 2013
Revised: October 15, 2013
Accepted: November 20, 2013
Published online: November 26, 2013
Revised: October 15, 2013
Accepted: November 20, 2013
Published online: November 26, 2013
Core Tip
Core tip: Finding duplicates is an indispensable step in a systematic review. The prevalence of duplicates ranges from 7% to 25%, as three different databases were searched (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library). Until now, few studies have reported the detailed information regarding how to find duplicates. A preliminary method to find duplicates is established, but its usefulness and convenience need to be further confirmed.