BMJ : British medical journal
-
To assess the quality of Cochrane reviews. ⋯ Cochrane reviews have previously been shown to be of higher quality and less biased on average than other systematic reviews, but improvement is always possible. The Cochrane Collaboration has taken steps to improve editorial processes and the quality of its reviews. Meanwhile, the Cochrane Library remains a key source of evidence about the effects of healthcare interventions. Its users should interpret reviews cautiously, particularly those with conclusions favouring experimental interventions and those with many typographical errors.
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Early enteral feeding versus "nil by mouth" after gastrointestinal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials.
To determine whether a period of starvation (nil by mouth) after gastrointestinal surgery is beneficial in terms of specific outcomes. ⋯ There seems to be no clear advantage to keeping patients nil by mouth after elective gastrointestinal resection. Early feeding may be of benefit. An adequately powered trial is required to confirm or refute the benefits seen in small trials.