In response to "Brimful of STARLITE".

摘要: I appreciate Andrew Booth's effort to promote standards for reporting the findings of systematic reviews qualitative research [1]. Yet, several our papers were erroneously considered in work. These (references 61, 83, and 84 Booth paper) not formal metasyntheses focused on methods such reviews, rather than results. misrepresented STARLITE analysis as they reports studies but methodological how do them, indicated each these papers. Booth also overlooks a key issue facing authors reviews: editors publishers decide what include have their own tailoring audiences. For example, we been told lists or details search terms, databases, related material conserve space. Authors are then compelled limit information provided make this additional detail available request. In addition, it may be seen duplicate publication repeat when two more synthesis written from same data set. Booth others interested issues wish read publications that address them further [2, 3].