Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews Finds Systematic Under-Reporting of Adverse Events


A systematic review by researchers from Canada, the U.K., and China finds that the 4,644 systematic reviews studied “compounded the poor reporting of harms data in primary studies by failing to report on harms or doing so inadequately.” The study, published in the British Medical Journal, proposes the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) standard for correcting the problem.

Article →

Zorzela, L., Golder, S., Liu, Y., Pilkington, K., et al; Quality of reporting in systematic reviews of adverse events: systematic review. British Medical Journal. Online January 8, 2014. doi:

Previous articleChildhood Abuse Predicts Lack of Resilience From Depression
Next articleDaily Cannabis Use Linked to Earlier Psychosis Onset
Kermit Cole
Kermit Cole, MFT, founding editor of Mad in America, works in Santa Fe, New Mexico as a couples and family therapist. Inspired by Open Dialogue, he works as part of a team and consults with couples and families that have members identified as patients. His work in residential treatment — largely with severely traumatized and/or "psychotic" clients — led to an appreciation of the power and beauty of systemic philosophy and practice, as the alternative to the prevailing focus on individual pathology. A former film-maker, he has undergraduate and master's degrees in psychology from Harvard University, as well as an MFT degree from the Council for Relationships in Philadelphia. He is a doctoral candidate with the Taos Institute and the Free University of Brussels. You can reach him at [email protected].