Reproductive rights.

This meta-analysis of meta-analyses is about as meta as it gets. It examined 154 published meta-analyses cited in the NCCN guidelines, re-ran their analyses, and were unable to reproduce the findings of over one-third of reports. The authors’ point is not that conclusions were wrong but simply that methods sections were consistently insufficient for others to ascertain how the conclusions were made, leading them to call for more reproducible reporting standards to strengthen trust and collaboration across the scientific community. | Wayant, JAMA Oncol 2019