Wasted resources in healthcare and research
Failure to do systematic reviews of relevant, reliable research evidence does harm even when it is not harming patients and people participating in research. This is because it can result in resources being wasted in healthcare and health research.
Could checking the evidence first have prevented a death?
“In a tragic situation that could have been averted, Ellen Roche, a healthy 24 year-old volunteer in an asthma study … died in 2001”
Had the researchers who did the tests in animals and the clinical researchers reviewed the results of the animal studies systematically, as they had emerged, it is very likely that thousands of patients would not have been invited to participate in the clinical trials. Indeed, this might have resulted in better use of resources for treating patients experiencing stroke, and studies that were more likely to be relevant to identifying improvements in treatments for the condition. And this is far from an isolated example. 
Next: Reports of new research should begin and end with systematic reviews