On 2013 Oct 28, Jamie Horder commented:

An excellent short paper in which the authors warn about the use of 'narrative' reviews of clinical evidence as a kind of poor-man's meta-analysis.

In reference to the novel antidepressant agomelatine, they point out that (at the time of writing) the PubMed search "agomelatine" + "depression", reveals 73 hits, of which no fewer than 34 were review papers. Of these reviews, 80% claimed efficacy for the drug.

Rigorous meta-analyses paint a much less positive picture of agomelatine's efficacy, they argue, and unsystematic reviews act as "a modern Trojan horse for reintroducing the brave old world of narrative-based medicine into medical journals."

On 2013 Oct 28, Jamie Horder commented:

An excellent short paper in which the authors warn about the use of 'narrative' reviews of clinical evidence as a kind of poor-man's meta-analysis.

In reference to the novel antidepressant agomelatine, they point out that (at the time of writing) the PubMed search "agomelatine" + "depression", reveals 73 hits, of which no fewer than 34 were review papers. Of these reviews, 80% claimed efficacy for the drug.

Rigorous meta-analyses paint a much less positive picture of agomelatine's efficacy, they argue, and unsystematic reviews act as "a modern Trojan horse for reintroducing the brave old world of narrative-based medicine into medical journals."