Article Text

Download PDFPDF

1710f Empty reviews: how, why or why not?
  1. D FitzGerald
  1. Medmark Occupational Healthcare, Cork, Ireland


Introduction Where no studies relevant to the scientific question being examined meet the pre-specified inclusion criteria, a systematic review becomes an ‘empty review’. As such, no robust evidence based conclusions can be drawn from the findings of these reviews. It may be that such reviews have been undertaken where there is not yet a sufficient body of knowledge to allow for a systematic review being undertaken. In such circumstances, the publication of an empty systematic review may prompt the funding for and development of studies to answer the relevant scientific question. Also, in is much as there is a benefit in knowing what evidence based recommendations can be made in clinical practice, it is also useful to know what commonly used treatments are prescribed based on generally accepted standard practice rather than proven clinical benefit. It may also be, however, that the question being examined is too narrow or too focused, with excessively broad exclusion criteria, to be of relevance in a typical clinical setting. The development of such systematic reviews may be regarded as wasteful in resource limited circumstances.

  • empty review
  • systematic review
  • evidenced based practice

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.