Reports of reports: how good are secondary publications in medicine?

Comment

. 2001 May 29;164(11):1580-1.

Comment

F Davidoff. CMAJ. 2001.

. 2001 May 29;164(11):1580-1.

No abstract available

Comment on

Reviewing the reviewers: the quality of reporting in three secondary journals.
Devereaux PJ, Manns BJ, Ghali WA, Quan H, Guyatt GH. Devereaux PJ, et al. CMAJ. 2001 May 29;164(11):1573-6. CMAJ. 2001. PMID: 11402795 Free PMC article.

Do family physicians retrieve synopses of clinical research previously read as email alerts?
Grad R, Pluye P, Johnson-Lafleur J, Granikov V, Shulha M, Bartlett G, Marlow B. Grad R, et al. J Med Internet Res. 2011 Nov 30;13(4):e101. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1683. J Med Internet Res. 2011. PMID: 22130465 Free PMC article.
Reporting characteristics of non-primary publications of results of randomized trials: a cross-sectional review.
Hopewell S, Collins GS, Hirst A, Kirtley S, Tajar A, Gerry S, Altman DG. Hopewell S, et al. Trials. 2013 Jul 31;14:240. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-240. Trials. 2013. PMID: 23902608 Free PMC article. Review.

1. Tröhler U. To improve the evidence of medicine. The 18th century British origins of a critical approach. Edinburgh: Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh; 2000. p. 2.
1. Tröhler U. To improve the evidence of medicine. The 18th century British origins of a critical approach. Edinburgh: Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh; 2000.
1. Rangachari PK. Evidence-based medicine: Old French wine with a new Canadian label? J R Soc Med 1997;90:280-4. - PMC - PubMed
1. Wilson EO. Consilience: the unity of knowledge. New York: Knopf; 1998. p. 59.
1. Chalmers I, Tröhler U. Helping physicians to keep abreast of the medical literature: medical and philosophical commentaries, 1773–1795. Ann Intern Med 2000;133:238-43. - PubMed