A survey of experts to identify methods to detect problematic studies: stage 1 of the INveStigating ProblEmatic Clinical Trials in Systematic Reviews project.

Background And Objective: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) inform health-care decisions. Unfortunately, some published RCTs contain false data, and some appear to have been entirely fabricated. Systematic reviews are performed to identify and synthesize all RCTs which have been conducted on a given topic.

A survey of experts to identify methods to detect problematic studies: Stage 1 of the INSPECT-SR Project.

Background: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) inform healthcare decisions. Unfortunately, some published RCTs contain false data, and some appear to have been entirely fabricated. Systematic reviews are performed to identify and synthesise all RCTs which have been conducted on a given topic.

Imaging predictors of progression of lumbar spondylolysis to spondylolisthesis: a systematic review.

Background Context: Isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS) is defined as the anterior translation of one lumbar vertebra relative to the next caudal segment as a result of a unilateral or bilateral fracture of the pars interarticularis. These fractures are interchangeably known as "pars defects" or "spondylolysis." Many risk factors have been proposed to explain the progression of a spondylolytic defect to IS, however, none are validated.

Protocol for the development of a tool (INSPECT-SR) to identify problematic randomised controlled trials in systematic reviews of health interventions.

Introduction: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) inform healthcare decisions. It is now apparent that some published RCTs contain false data and some appear to have been entirely fabricated. Systematic reviews are performed to identify and synthesise all RCTs that have been conducted on a given topic.