ArticleSystematic reviews2025
Integrating case reports into systematic reviews: methodological strategies and challenges.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The diagnosis and management of ectopic thyroid cancer: a systematic review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Pooled it
- Occult squamous cell carcinoma presenting as oligometastatic lymphadenopathy. A systematic review with a case report.Oncology reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Pulmonary hypertension following lung transplant: a systematic review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- Management of Hereditary Hypofibrinogenemia During Pregnancy: A Scoping Review Towards Personalized Obstetric Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Systematic reviews are used in medical research to synthesize evidence by collecting evidence from available literature without overlooking important sources or pieces. Several guidelines are available for the methodological implementation of a systematic review; however, none of them include case reports or case series as a potential source of information that could be pooled and analyzed. Although case reports may be criticized as an evidence source, they are important for documenting certain types of evidence such as rare conditions, adverse events, or novel emergent diseases. In this article, we attempt to set the foundation for a guideline on the systematic review of cases, and we suggest a step-by-step guide for investigators to employ for systematically reviewing case reports. We also dissect the application of this methodology in the available literature and review a case study of a systematic review of case reports. Generally, case reports can be synthesized into a systematic review, providing evidence on matters that may be hard to investigate using other methodologies, but concerns regarding quality and level of evidence remain present.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.