Margaret A.WinkerMD, Senior EditorIndividualAuthorPhil B.FontanarosaMD, Senior EditorIndividualAuthor
To the Editor.—For systematic reviews to be comprehensive and reliable, they need to include as many as possible relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in any language. Excluding RCTs from a systematic review on the basis of language of publication can lead to loss of precision1 and bias.2 Most Chinese research is published in Chinese and is therefore not accessible to the Western world. The Cochrane Stroke Group, therefore, developed collaborative links to identify RCTs in the Chinese literature and to facilitate the conduct of systematic reviews both in stroke and other fields.
Liu M, Counsell C, Sandercock P. Report of Randomized Controlled Trials Identified in the Chinese Literature vs MEDLINE. JAMA. 1998;280(15):1308–1309. doi:10-1001/pubs.JAMA-ISSN-0098-7484-280-15-jbk1021
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: