ReviewBone marrow transplantation2021
Systematic reviews in hematopoietic cell transplantation and cellular therapy: considerations and guidance from the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research late effects and quality of life working committee.
Review in Bone marrow transplantation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
18 authors at 15 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Systematic reviews apply rigorous methodologies to address a pre-specified, clearly formulated clinical research question. The conclusion that results is often cited to more robustly inform decision-making by clinicians, third-party payers and managed care organizations about the clinical question of interest. While systematic reviews provide a rigorous standard, they may be unfeasible when the task is to create general disease-focused guidelines comprised of multiple clinical practice questions versus a single major clinical practice question. Collaborating transplantation and cellular therapy societal committees also recognize that the quantity and or quality of reference sources may be insufficient for a meaningful systematic review. As the conduct of systematic reviews has evolved over time in terms of grading systems, reporting requirements and use of technology, here we provide current guidance in methodologies, resources for reviewers, and approaches to overcome challenges in conducting systematic reviews in transplantation and cellular therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.