An e-mail survey identified unpublished studies for systematic reviews.

PubMed

Reveiz, Ludovic; Cardona, Andres Felipe; Ospina, Edgar Guillermo; de Agular, Sylvia

2006-07-01

A large number of trials remain difficult to locate or unpublished for systematic reviews. The objective of this article was to determine the usefulness of making e-mail contact with authors of clinical trials and literature reviews found in MEDLINE to identify unpublished or difficult to locate Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). A structured search for detecting RCTs in MEDLINE was made from January 1999 to June 2003; a questionnaire was sent to a random sample of 525 author's mails. Those RCTs obtained were sought in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, LILACS, and ongoing registers. 40 (7.6%) replies were received; 10 previously undescribed and unpublished RCTs and 21 unregistered ongoing RCTs were found. The most frequently given reasons for not publishing were: lack of time for finalizing the statistical analysis and preparing the manuscript, contractual obligations with the pharmaceutical industry, methodologic errors in designing, and editorial rejection. Using the e-mails of authors detected by the search in electronic databases could contribute toward detecting potentially relevant ongoing or unpublished RCTs enabling rapid, straightforward, low-cost systematic review; in addition, the results of this study support the need of universal registration of all studies at their inception.

Techniques for Identifying Cross-Disciplinary and "Hard-to-Detect" Evidence for Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

O'Mara-Eves, Alison; Brunton, Ginny; McDaid, David; Kavanagh, Josephine; Oliver, Sandy; Thomas, James

2014-01-01

Driven by necessity in our own complex review, we developed alternative systematic ways of identifying relevant evidence where the key concepts are generally not focal to the primary studies' aims and are found across multiple disciplines--that is, hard-to-detect evidence. Specifically, we sought to identify evidence on community engagement in…

Family-based interventions for substance misuse: a systematic review of systematic reviews--protocol.

PubMed

Akram, Yasmin; Copello, Alex; Moore, David

2014-08-15

Worldwide, there are an estimated 15 million individuals with drug use disorders and over five times as many with alcohol use disorders (WHO 1:2, 2005). Most individuals with substance misuse have families who are affected. Initial scoping searches identified an expanse of broad and disparate studies and reviews on the family interventions for substance misuse. This systematic review of systematic reviews aims to bring together the expanse of research on the effectiveness of family-based interventions in substance misuse.Initial scoping searches identified an expanse of broad and disparate studies and reviews on the family interventions for substance misuse. This systematic review of systematic reviews aims to bring together the expanse of research on the effectiveness of family-based interventions in substance misuse. Extensive electronic and manual searches will be undertaken. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment will be undertaken by two reviewers with disagreements resolved through discussion.The inclusion criteria will be that the study is a systematically undertaken review, the population is individuals with substance misuse problems and the interventions include a family-focused component. Reviews that focus on prevention rather than treatment will be excluded. The reviews will be assessed for quality and relevance. The evidence from included systematic reviews will be mapped by focus of intervention (promoting engagement of user into treatment/joint involvement in treatment of user/treating family member in own right) for both adults and adolescents for drug and/or alcohol misusers to allow assessment of the density of available evidence. The higher-quality, up-to-date evidence for each domain will be identified and described, and conclusions will be drawn with limitations of the evidence highlighted. This systematic review of systematic reviews will be an efficient and robust way of looking at the current state of the evidence in the field of

Systems to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing in people with advanced dementia: a systematic review.

PubMed

Disalvo, Domenica; Luckett, Tim; Agar, Meera; Bennett, Alexandra; Davidson, Patricia Mary

2016-05-31

Systems for identifying potentially inappropriate medications in older adults are not immediately transferrable to advanced dementia, where the management goal is palliation. The aim of the systematic review was to identify and synthesise published systems and make recommendations for identifying potentially inappropriate prescribing in advanced dementia. Studies were included if published in a peer-reviewed English language journal and concerned with identifying the appropriateness or otherwise of medications in advanced dementia or dementia and palliative care. The quality of each study was rated using the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist. Synthesis was narrative due to heterogeneity among designs and measures. Medline (OVID), CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2005 - August 2014) and AMED were searched in October 2014. Reference lists of relevant reviews and included articles were searched manually. Eight studies were included, all of which were scored a high quality using the STROBE checklist. Five studies used the same system developed by the Palliative Excellence in Alzheimer Care Efforts (PEACE) Program. One study used number of medications as an index, and two studies surveyed health professionals' opinions on appropriateness of specific medications in different clinical scenarios. Future research is needed to develop and validate systems with clinical utility for improving safety and quality of prescribing in advanced dementia. Systems should account for individual clinical context and distinguish between deprescribing and initiation of medications.

Comparison of search strategies in systematic reviews of adverse effects to other systematic reviews.

PubMed

Golder, Su; Loke, Yoon K; Zorzela, Liliane

2014-06-01

Research indicates that the methods used to identify data for systematic reviews of adverse effects may need to differ from other systematic reviews. To compare search methods in systematic reviews of adverse effects with other reviews. The search methodologies in 849 systematic reviews of adverse effects were compared with other reviews. Poor reporting of search strategies is apparent in both systematic reviews of adverse effects and other types of systematic reviews. Systematic reviews of adverse effects are less likely to restrict their searches to MEDLINE or include only randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The use of other databases is largely dependent on the topic area and the year the review was conducted, with more databases searched in more recent reviews. Adverse effects search terms are used by 72% of reviews and despite recommendations only two reviews report using floating subheadings. The poor reporting of search strategies in systematic reviews is universal, as is the dominance of searching MEDLINE. However, reviews of adverse effects are more likely to include a range of study designs (not just RCTs) and search beyond MEDLINE. © 2014 Crown Copyright.

Quasi-experimental study designs series-paper 8: identifying quasi-experimental studies to inform systematic reviews.

PubMed

Glanville, Julie; Eyers, John; Jones, Andrew M; Shemilt, Ian; Wang, Grace; Johansen, Marit; Fiander, Michelle; Rothstein, Hannah

2017-09-01

This article reviews the available evidence and guidance on methods to identify reports of quasi-experimental (QE) studies to inform systematic reviews of health care, public health, international development, education, crime and justice, and social welfare. Research, guidance, and examples of search strategies were identified by searching a range of databases, key guidance documents, selected reviews, conference proceedings, and personal communication. Current practice and research evidence were summarized. Four thousand nine hundred twenty-four records were retrieved by database searches, and additional documents were obtained by other searches. QE studies are challenging to identify efficiently because they have no standardized nomenclature and may be indexed in various ways. Reliable search filters are not available. There is a lack of specific resources devoted to collecting QE studies and little evidence on where best to search. Searches to identify QE studies should search a range of resources and, until indexing improves, use strategies that focus on the topic rather than the study design. Better definitions, better indexing in databases, prospective registers, and reporting guidance are required to improve the retrieval of QE studies and promote systematic reviews of what works based on the evidence from such studies. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Validated methods for identifying tuberculosis patients in health administrative databases: systematic review.

PubMed

Ronald, L A; Ling, D I; FitzGerald, J M; Schwartzman, K; Bartlett-Esquilant, G; Boivin, J-F; Benedetti, A; Menzies, D

2017-05-01

An increasing number of studies are using health administrative databases for tuberculosis (TB) research. However, there are limitations to using such databases for identifying patients with TB. To summarise validated methods for identifying TB in health administrative databases. We conducted a systematic literature search in two databases (Ovid Medline and Embase, January 1980-January 2016). We limited the search to diagnostic accuracy studies assessing algorithms derived from drug prescription, International Classification of Diseases (ICD) diagnostic code and/or laboratory data for identifying patients with TB in health administrative databases. The search identified 2413 unique citations. Of the 40 full-text articles reviewed, we included 14 in our review. Algorithms and diagnostic accuracy outcomes to identify TB varied widely across studies, with positive predictive value ranging from 1.3% to 100% and sensitivity ranging from 20% to 100%. Diagnostic accuracy measures of algorithms using out-patient, in-patient and/or laboratory data to identify patients with TB in health administrative databases vary widely across studies. Use solely of ICD diagnostic codes to identify TB, particularly when using out-patient records, is likely to lead to incorrect estimates of case numbers, given the current limitations of ICD systems in coding TB.

A competency framework for librarians involved in systematic reviews.

PubMed

Townsend, Whitney A; Anderson, Patricia F; Ginier, Emily C; MacEachern, Mark P; Saylor, Kate M; Shipman, Barbara L; Smith, Judith E

2017-07-01

The project identified a set of core competencies for librarians who are involved in systematic reviews. A team of seven informationists with broad systematic review experience examined existing systematic review standards, conducted a literature search, and used their own expertise to identify core competencies and skills that are necessary to undertake various roles in systematic review projects. The team identified a total of six competencies for librarian involvement in systematic reviews: "Systematic review foundations," "Process management and communication," "Research methodology," "Comprehensive searching," "Data management," and "Reporting." Within each competency are the associated skills and knowledge pieces (indicators). Competence can be measured using an adaptation of Miller's Pyramid for Clinical Assessment, either through self-assessment or identification of formal assessment instruments. The Systematic Review Competencies Framework provides a standards-based, flexible way for librarians and organizations to identify areas of competence and areas in need of development to build capacity for systematic review integration. The framework can be used to identify or develop appropriate assessment tools and to target skill development opportunities.

Factors contributing to chronic ankle instability: a protocol for a systematic review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Thompson, Cassandra; Schabrun, Siobhan; Romero, Rick; Bialocerkowski, Andrea; Marshall, Paul

2016-06-07

Ankle sprains are a significant clinical problem. Researchers have identified a multitude of factors contributing to the presence of recurrent ankle sprains including deficits in balance, postural control, kinematics, muscle activity, strength, range of motion, ligament laxity and bone/joint characteristics. Unfortunately, the literature examining the presence of these factors in chronic ankle instability (CAI) is conflicting. As a result, researchers have attempted to integrate this evidence using systematic reviews to reach conclusions; however, readers are now faced with an increasing number of systematic review findings that are also conflicting. The overall aim of this review is to critically appraise the methodological quality of previous systematic reviews and pool this evidence to identify contributing factors to CAI. A systematic review will be conducted on systematic reviews that investigate the presence of various deficits identified in CAI. Databases will be searched using pre-determined search terms. Reviews will then be assessed for inclusion based on the set eligibility criteria. Two independent reviewers will assess the articles for inclusion before evaluating the methodological quality and presence of bias of the included studies; any disagreements will be resolved by discussion between reviewers to reach consensus or by a third reviewer. Data concerning the specific research question, search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, population, method and outcomes will be extracted. Findings will be analysed with respect to the methodological quality of the included reviews. It is expected that this review will clarify the cause of contradicting findings in the literature and facilitate future research directions. PROSPERO CRD42016032592 .

Identifying additional studies for a systematic review of retention strategies in randomised controlled trials: making contact with trials units and trial methodologists.

PubMed

Brueton, Valerie; Tierney, Jayne F; Stenning, Sally; Rait, Greta

2017-08-22

Search strategies for systematic reviews aim to identify all evidence relevant to the research question posed. Reports of methodological research can be difficult to find leading to biased results in systematic reviews of research methodology. Evidence suggests that contact with investigators can help to identify unpublished research. To identify additional eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for a Cochrane systematic review of strategies to improve retention in RCTs, we conducted a survey of UK clinical trials units (CTUs) and made contact with RCT methodologists. Key contacts for all UK CTUs were sent a personalised email with a short questionnaire and summary protocol of the Cochrane methodology review. The questionnaire asked whether a RCT evaluating strategies to improve retention embedded in a RCT had ever been conducted by the CTU. Questions about the stage of completion and publication of such RCTs were included. The summary protocol outlined the aims, eligibility criteria, examples of types of retention strategies, and the primary outcome for the systematic review. Personal communication with RCT methodologists and presentations of preliminary results of the review at conferences were also used to identify additional eligible RCTs. We checked the results of our standard searches to see if eligible studies identified through these additional methods were also found using our standard searches. We identified 14 of the 38 RCTs included in the Cochrane methodology review by contacting trials units and methodologists. Eleven of the 14 RCTs identified by these methods were either published in grey literature, in press or unpublished. Three remaining RCTs were fully published at the time. Six of the RCTs identified were not found through any other searches. The RCTs identified represented data for 6 of 14 RCTs of incentive strategies (52% of randomised participants included in the review), and 6 of 14 RCTs of communication strategies (52% of randomised

Integration of existing systematic reviews into new reviews: identification of guidance needs

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background An exponential increase in the number of systematic reviews published, and constrained resources for new reviews, means that there is an urgent need for guidance on explicitly and transparently integrating existing reviews into new systematic reviews. The objectives of this paper are: 1) to identify areas where existing guidance may be adopted or adapted, and 2) to suggest areas for future guidance development. Methods We searched documents and websites from healthcare focused systematic review organizations to identify and, where available, to summarize relevant guidance on the use of existing systematic reviews. We conducted informational interviews with members of Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPCs) to gather experiences in integrating existing systematic reviews, including common issues and challenges, as well as potential solutions. Results There was consensus among systematic review organizations and the EPCs about some aspects of incorporating existing systematic reviews into new reviews. Current guidance may be used in assessing the relevance of prior reviews and in scanning references of prior reviews to identify studies for a new review. However, areas of challenge remain. Areas in need of guidance include how to synthesize, grade the strength of, and present bodies of evidence composed of primary studies and existing systematic reviews. For instance, empiric evidence is needed regarding how to quality check data abstraction and when and how to use study-level risk of bias assessments from prior reviews. Conclusions There remain areas of uncertainty for how to integrate existing systematic reviews into new reviews. Methods research and consensus processes among systematic review organizations are needed to develop guidance to address these challenges. PMID:24956937

Converting systematic reviews to Cochrane format: a cross-sectional survey of Australian authors of systematic reviews

PubMed Central

Piehl, Janet H; Green, Sally; McDonald, Steve

2003-01-01

Background Despite the growing reputation and subject coverage of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, many systematic reviews continue to be published solely in paper-based health care journals. This study was designed to determine why authors choose to publish their systematic reviews outside of the Cochrane Collaboration and if they might be interested in converting their reviews to Cochrane format for publication in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Methods Cross-sectional survey of Australian primary authors of systematic reviews not published on the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews identified from the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness. Results We identified 88 systematic reviews from the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness with an Australian as the primary author. We surveyed 52 authors for whom valid contact information was available. The response rate was 88 per cent (46/52). Ten authors replied without completing the survey, leaving 36 valid surveys for analysis. The most frequently cited reasons for not undertaking a Cochrane review were: lack of time (78%), the need to undergo specific Cochrane training (46%), unwillingness to update reviews (36%), difficulties with the Cochrane process (26%) and the review topic already registered with the Cochrane Collaboration (21%). (Percentages based on completed responses to individual questions.) Nearly half the respondents would consider converting their review to Cochrane format. Dedicated time emerged as the most important factor in facilitating the potential conversion process. Other factors included navigating the Cochrane system, assistance with updating and financial support. Eighty-six per cent were willing to have their review converted to Cochrane format by another author. Conclusion Time required to complete a Cochrane review and the need for specific training are the primary reasons why some authors publish systematic reviews outside of the

Methodological quality of systematic reviews addressing femoroacetabular impingement.

PubMed

Kowalczuk, Marcin; Adamich, John; Simunovic, Nicole; Farrokhyar, Forough; Ayeni, Olufemi R

2015-09-01

As the body of literature on femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) continues to grow, clinicians turn to systematic reviews to remain current with the best available evidence. The quality of systematic reviews in the FAI literature is currently unknown. The goal of this study was to assess the quality of the reporting of systematic reviews addressing FAI over the last 11 years (2003-2014) and to identify the specific methodological shortcomings and strengths. A search of the electronic databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed, was performed to identify relevant systematic reviews. Methodological quality was assessed by two reviewers using the revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR) scoring tool. An intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) was used to determine agreement between reviewers on R-AMSTAR quality scores. A total of 22 systematic reviews were assessed for methodological quality. The mean consensus R-AMSTAR score across all studies was 26.7 out of 40.0, indicating fair methodological quality. An ICC of 0.931, 95 % CI 0.843-0.971 indicated excellent agreement between reviewers during the scoring process. The systematic reviews addressing FAI are generally of fair methodological quality. Use of tools such as the R-AMSTAR score or PRISMA guidelines while designing future systematic reviews can assist in eliminating methodological shortcomings identified in this review. These shortcomings need to be kept in mind by clinicians when applying the current literature to their patient populations and making treatment decisions. Systematic reviews of highest methodological quality should be used by clinicians when possible to answer clinical questions.

Systematic searching for theory to inform systematic reviews: is it feasible? Is it desirable?

PubMed

Booth, Andrew; Carroll, Christopher

2015-09-01

In recognising the potential value of theory in understanding how interventions work comes a challenge - how to make identification of theory less haphazard? To explore the feasibility of systematic identification of theory. We searched PubMed for published reviews (1998-2012) that had explicitly sought to identify theory. Systematic searching may be characterised by a structured question, methodological filters and an itemised search procedure. We constructed a template (BeHEMoTh - Behaviour of interest; Health context; Exclusions; Models or Theories) for use when systematically identifying theory. The authors tested the template within two systematic reviews. Of 34 systematic reviews, only 12 reviews (35%) reported a method for identifying theory. Nineteen did not specify how they identified studies containing theory. Data were unavailable for three reviews. Candidate terms include concept(s)/conceptual, framework(s), model(s), and theory/theories/theoretical. Information professionals must overcome inadequate reporting and the use of theory out of context. The review team faces an additional concern in lack of 'theory fidelity'. Based on experience with two systematic reviews, the BeHEMoTh template and procedure offers a feasible and useful approach for identification of theory. Applications include realist synthesis, framework synthesis or review of complex interventions. The procedure requires rigorous evaluation. © 2015 Health Libraries Group.

Can Communicating Personalised Disease Risk Promote Healthy Behaviour Change? A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.

PubMed

French, David P; Cameron, Elaine; Benton, Jack S; Deaton, Christi; Harvie, Michelle

2017-10-01

The assessment and communication of disease risk that is personalised to the individual is widespread in healthcare contexts. Despite several systematic reviews of RCTs, it is unclear under what circumstances that personalised risk estimates promotes change in four key health-related behaviours: smoking, physical activity, diet and alcohol consumption. The present research aims to systematically identify, evaluate and synthesise the findings of existing systematic reviews. This systematic review of systematic reviews followed published guidance. A search of four databases and two-stage screening procedure with good reliability identified nine eligible systematic reviews. The nine reviews each included between three and 15 primary studies, containing 36 unique studies. Methods of personalising risk feedback included imaging/visual feedback, genetic testing, and numerical estimation from risk algorithms. The reviews were generally high quality. For a broad range of methods of estimating and communicating risk, the reviews found no evidence that risk information had strong or consistent effects on health-related behaviours. The most promising effects came from interventions using visual or imaging techniques and with smoking cessation and dietary behaviour as outcomes, but with inconsistent results. Few interventions explicitly used theory, few targeted self-efficacy or response efficacy, and a limited range of Behaviour Change Techniques were used. Presenting risk information on its own, even when highly personalised, does not produce strong effects on health-related behaviours or changes which are sustained. Future research in this area should build on the existing knowledge base about increasing the effects of risk communication on behaviour.

Identifying the women at risk of antenatal anxiety and depression: A systematic review.

PubMed

Biaggi, Alessandra; Conroy, Susan; Pawlby, Susan; Pariante, Carmine M

2016-02-01

Pregnancy is a time of increased vulnerability for the development of anxiety and depression. This systematic review aims to identify the main risk factors involved in the onset of antenatal anxiety and depression. A systematic literature analysis was conducted, using PubMed, PsychINFO, and the Cochrane Library. Original papers were included if they were written in English and published between 1st January 2003 and 31st August 2015, while literature reviews and meta-analyses were consulted regardless of publication date. A final number of 97 papers were selected. The most relevant factors associated with antenatal depression or anxiety were: lack of partner or of social support; history of abuse or of domestic violence; personal history of mental illness; unplanned or unwanted pregnancy; adverse events in life and high perceived stress; present/past pregnancy complications; and pregnancy loss. The review does not include a meta-analysis, which may have added additional information about the differential impact of each risk factor. Moreover, it does not specifically examine factors that may influence different types of anxiety disorders, or the recurrence or persistence of depression or anxiety from pregnancy to the postpartum period. The results show the complex aetiology of antenatal depression and anxiety. The administration of a screening tool to identify women at risk of anxiety and depression during pregnancy should be universal practice in order to promote the long-term wellbeing of mothers and babies, and the knowledge of specific risk factors may help creating such screening tool targeting women at higher risk. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Developing the WCRF International/University of Bristol Methodology for Identifying and Carrying Out Systematic Reviews of Mechanisms of Exposure-Cancer Associations.

PubMed

Lewis, Sarah J; Gardner, Mike; Higgins, Julian; Holly, Jeff M P; Gaunt, Tom R; Perks, Claire M; Turner, Suzanne D; Rinaldi, Sabina; Thomas, Steve; Harrison, Sean; Lennon, Rosie J; Tan, Vanessa; Borwick, Cath; Emmett, Pauline; Jeffreys, Mona; Northstone, Kate; Mitrou, Giota; Wiseman, Martin; Thompson, Rachel; Martin, Richard M

2017-11-01

Background: Human, animal, and cell experimental studies; human biomarker studies; and genetic studies complement epidemiologic findings and can offer insights into biological plausibility and pathways between exposure and disease, but methods for synthesizing such studies are lacking. We, therefore, developed a methodology for identifying mechanisms and carrying out systematic reviews of mechanistic studies that underpin exposure-cancer associations. Methods: A multidisciplinary team with expertise in informatics, statistics, epidemiology, systematic reviews, cancer biology, and nutrition was assembled. Five 1-day workshops were held to brainstorm ideas; in the intervening periods we carried out searches and applied our methods to a case study to test our ideas. Results: We have developed a two-stage framework, the first stage of which is designed to identify mechanisms underpinning a specific exposure-disease relationship; the second stage is a targeted systematic review of studies on a specific mechanism. As part of the methodology, we also developed an online tool for text mining for mechanism prioritization (TeMMPo) and a new graph for displaying related but heterogeneous data from epidemiologic studies (the Albatross plot). Conclusions: We have developed novel tools for identifying mechanisms and carrying out systematic reviews of mechanistic studies of exposure-disease relationships. In doing so, we have outlined how we have overcome the challenges that we faced and provided researchers with practical guides for conducting mechanistic systematic reviews. Impact: The aforementioned methodology and tools will allow potential mechanisms to be identified and the strength of the evidence underlying a particular mechanism to be assessed. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(11); 1667-75. ©2017 AACR . ©2017 American Association for Cancer Research.

Optimizing literature search in systematic reviews - are MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL enough for identifying effect studies within the area of musculoskeletal disorders?

PubMed

Aagaard, Thomas; Lund, Hans; Juhl, Carsten

2016-11-22

When conducting systematic reviews, it is essential to perform a comprehensive literature search to identify all published studies relevant to the specific research question. The Cochrane Collaborations Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) guidelines state that searching MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL should be considered mandatory. The aim of this study was to evaluate the MECIR recommendations to use MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL combined, and examine the yield of using these to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) within the area of musculoskeletal disorders. Data sources were systematic reviews published by the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group, including at least five RCTs, reporting a search history, searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and adding reference- and hand-searching. Additional databases were deemed eligible if they indexed RCTs, were in English and used in more than three of the systematic reviews. Relative recall was calculated as the number of studies identified by the literature search divided by the number of eligible studies i.e. included studies in the individual systematic reviews. Finally, cumulative median recall was calculated for MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL combined followed by the databases yielding additional studies. Deemed eligible was twenty-three systematic reviews and the databases included other than MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL was AMED, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, MANTIS, OT-Seeker, PEDro, PsychINFO, SCOPUS, SportDISCUS and Web of Science. Cumulative median recall for combined searching in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL was 88.9% and increased to 90.9% when adding 10 additional databases. Searching MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL was not sufficient for identifying all effect studies on musculoskeletal disorders, but additional ten databases did only increase the median recall by 2%. It is possible that searching databases is not sufficient to identify all relevant references, and that reviewers must rely upon

Do evidence summaries increase policy-makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews: A systematic review protocol.

PubMed

Petkovic, Jennifer; Welch, Vivian; Tugwell, Peter

2015-09-28

Systematic reviews are important for decision-makers. They offer many potential benefits but are often written in technical language, are too long, and do not contain contextual details which makes them hard to use for decision-making. There are many organizations that develop and disseminate derivative products, such as evidence summaries, from systematic reviews for different populations or subsets of decision-makers. This systematic review will assess the effectiveness of systematic review summaries on increasing policymakers' use of systematic review evidence and to identify the components or features of these summaries that are most effective. We will include studies of policy-makers at all levels as well as health-system managers. We will include studies examining any type of "evidence summary," "policy brief," or other products derived from systematic reviews that present evidence in a summarized form. The primary outcomes are the following: (1) use of systematic review summaries decision-making (e.g., self-reported use of the evidence in policy-making, decision-making) and (2) policy-maker understanding, knowledge, and/or beliefs (e.g., changes in knowledge scores about the topic included in the summary). We will conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs), controlled before-after studies (CBA), and interrupted time series (ITS) studies. The results of this review will inform the development of future systematic review summaries to ensure that systematic review evidence is accessible to and used by policy-makers making health-related decisions.

A systematic review of the quality of conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric surgery

PubMed Central

Gudlaugsdottir, Katrin; Andrews, James

2017-01-01

Objective Our objective was to evaluate quality of conduct and reporting of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric surgery. We also aimed to identify characteristics predictive of review quality. Background Systematic reviews summarise evidence by combining sources, but are potentially prone to bias. To counter this, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was published to aid in reporting. Similarly, the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) measurement tool was designed to appraise methodology. The paediatric surgical literature has seen an increasing number of reviews over the past decade, but quality has not been evaluated. Methods Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, we performed a systematic review with a priori design to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interventions in paediatric surgery. From 01/2010 to 06/2016, we searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Web of Science, Google Scholar, reference lists and journals. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. We assessed conduct and reporting using AMSTAR and PRISMA. Scores were calculated as the sum of reported items. We also extracted author, journal and article characteristics, and used them in exploratory analysis to determine which variables predict quality. Results 112 articles fulfilled eligibility criteria (53 systematic reviews; 59 meta-analyses). Overall, 68% AMSTAR and 56.8% PRISMA items were reported adequately. Poorest scores were identified with regards a priori design, inclusion of structured summaries, including the grey literature, citing excluded articles and evaluating bias. 13 reviews were pre-registered and 6 in PRISMA-endorsing journals. The following predicted quality in univariate analysis:, word count, Cochrane review, journal h-index, impact factor, journal endorses PRISMA, PRISMA adherence suggested in author guidance

Methods to systematically review and meta-analyse observational studies: a systematic scoping review of recommendations.

PubMed

Mueller, Monika; D'Addario, Maddalena; Egger, Matthias; Cevallos, Myriam; Dekkers, Olaf; Mugglin, Catrina; Scott, Pippa

2018-05-21

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies are frequently performed, but no widely accepted guidance is available at present. We performed a systematic scoping review of published methodological recommendations on how to systematically review and meta-analyse observational studies. We searched online databases and websites and contacted experts in the field to locate potentially eligible articles. We included articles that provided any type of recommendation on how to conduct systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies. We extracted and summarised recommendations on pre-defined key items: protocol development, research question, search strategy, study eligibility, data extraction, dealing with different study designs, risk of bias assessment, publication bias, heterogeneity, statistical analysis. We summarised recommendations by key item, identifying areas of agreement and disagreement as well as areas where recommendations were missing or scarce. The searches identified 2461 articles of which 93 were eligible. Many recommendations for reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies were transferred from guidance developed for reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs. Although there was substantial agreement in some methodological areas there was also considerable disagreement on how evidence synthesis of observational studies should be conducted. Conflicting recommendations were seen on topics such as the inclusion of different study designs in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the use of quality scales to assess the risk of bias, and the choice of model (e.g. fixed vs. random effects) for meta-analysis. There is a need for sound methodological guidance on how to conduct systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies, which critically considers areas in which there are conflicting recommendations.

Three challenges described for identifying participants with missing data in trials reports, and potential solutions suggested to systematic reviewers.

PubMed

Akl, Elie A; Kahale, Lara A; Ebrahim, Shanil; Alonso-Coello, Pablo; Schünemann, Holger J; Guyatt, Gordon H

2016-08-01

To categorize the challenges in determining the extent of missing participant data in randomized trials and suggest potential solutions for systematic review authors. During the process of updating a series of Cochrane systematic reviews on the topic of anticoagulation in patients with cancer, we identified challenges and used an iterative approach to improve, and a consensus process to agree on the challenges identified, and to suggest potential ways of dealing with them. The five systematic reviews included 58 trials and 75 meta-analyses for patient-important dichotomous outcomes with 27,037 randomized participants. We identified three categories of challenges: (1) Although systematic reviewers require information about missing data to be reported by outcome, trialists typically report the information by participant; (2) It is not always clear whether the trialists followed up participants in certain categories (e.g., noncompliers), that is, whether some categories of participants did or did not have missing data; (3) It is not always clear how the trialists dealt with missing data in their analysis (e.g., exclusion from the denominator vs. assumptions made for the numerator). We discuss potential solutions for each one of these challenges and suggest further research work. Current reporting of missing data is often not explicit and transparent, and although our potential solutions to problems of suboptimal reporting may be helpful, reliable and valid characterization of the extent and nature of missing data remains elusive. Reporting of missing data in trials needs further improvement. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Review and Synthesize Completed Research Through Systematic Review.

PubMed

Hopp, Lisa; Rittenmeyer, Leslie

2015-10-01

The evidence-based health care movement has generated new opportunity for scholars to generate synthesized sources of evidence. Systematic reviews are rigorous forms of synthesized evidence that scholars can conduct if they have requisite skills, time, and access to excellent library resources. Systematic reviews play an important role in synthesizing what is known and unknown about a particular health issue. Thus, they have a synergistic relationship with primary research. They can both inform clinical decisions when the evidence is adequate and identify gaps in knowledge to inform research priorities. Systematic reviews can be conducted of quantitative and qualitative evidence to answer many types of questions. They all share characteristics of rigor that arise from a priori protocol development, transparency, exhaustive searching, dual independent reviewers who critically appraise studies using standardized tools, rigor in synthesis, and peer review at multiple stages in the conduct and reporting of the systematic review. © The Author(s) 2015.

Identifying Complementary and Alternative Medicine Usage Information from Internet Resources. A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Sharma, Vivekanand; Holmes, John H; Sarkar, Indra N

2016-08-05

Identify and highlight research issues and methods used in studying Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) information needs, access, and exchange over the Internet. A literature search was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines from PubMed to identify articles that have studied Internet use in the CAM context. Additional searches were conducted at Nature.com and Google Scholar. The Internet provides a major medium for attaining CAM information and can also serve as an avenue for conducting CAM related surveys. Based on the literature analyzed in this review, there seems to be significant interest in developing methodologies for identifying CAM treatments, including the analysis of search query data and social media platform discussions. Several studies have also underscored the challenges in developing approaches for identifying the reliability of CAM-related information on the Internet, which may not be supported with reliable sources. The overall findings of this review suggest that there are opportunities for developing approaches for making available accurate information and developing ways to restrict the spread and sale of potentially harmful CAM products and information. Advances in Internet research are yet to be used in context of understanding CAM prevalence and perspectives. Such approaches may provide valuable insights into the current trends and needs in context of CAM use and spread.

IDENTIFYING COMPLEMENTARY AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE USAGE INFORMATION FROM INTERNET RESOURCES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

PubMed Central

Sharma, V.; Holmes, J.H.; Sarkar, I.N.

2016-01-01

SUMMARY Objective Identify and highlight research issues and methods used in studying Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) information needs, access, and exchange over the Internet. Methods A literature search was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines from PubMed to identify articles that have studied Internet use in the CAM context. Additional searches were conducted at Nature.com and Google Scholar. Results The Internet provides a major medium for attaining CAM information and can also serve as an avenue for conducting CAM related surveys. Based on the literature analyzed in this review, there seems to be significant interest in developing methodologies for identifying CAM treatments, including the analysis of search query data and social media platform discussions. Several studies have also underscored the challenges in developing approaches for identifying the reliability of CAM-related information on the Internet, which may not be supported with reliable sources. The overall findings of this review suggest that there are opportunities for developing approaches for making available accurate information and developing ways to restrict the spread and sale of potentially harmful CAM products and information. Conclusions Advances in Internet research are yet to be used in context of understanding CAM prevalence and perspectives. Such approaches may provide valuable insights into the current trends and needs in context of CAM use and spread. PMID:27352304

Methodological systematic review identifies major limitations in prioritization processes for updating.

PubMed

Martínez García, Laura; Pardo-Hernandez, Hector; Superchi, Cecilia; Niño de Guzman, Ena; Ballesteros, Monica; Ibargoyen Roteta, Nora; McFarlane, Emma; Posso, Margarita; Roqué I Figuls, Marta; Rotaeche Del Campo, Rafael; Sanabria, Andrea Juliana; Selva, Anna; Solà, Ivan; Vernooij, Robin W M; Alonso-Coello, Pablo

2017-06-01

The aim of the study was to identify and describe strategies to prioritize the updating of systematic reviews (SRs), health technology assessments (HTAs), or clinical guidelines (CGs). We conducted an SR of studies describing one or more methods to prioritize SRs, HTAs, or CGs for updating. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed, from 1966 to August 2016) and The Cochrane Methodology Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 8 2016). We hand searched abstract books, reviewed reference lists, and contacted experts. Two reviewers independently screened the references and extracted data. We included 14 studies. Six studies were classified as descriptive (6 of 14, 42.9%) and eight as implementation studies (8 of 14, 57.1%). Six studies reported an updating strategy (6 of 14, 42.9%), six a prioritization process (6 of 14, 42.9%), and two a prioritization criterion (2 of 14, 14.2%). Eight studies focused on SRs (8 of 14, 57.1%), six studies focused on CGs (6 of 14, 42.9%), and none were about HTAs. We identified 76 prioritization criteria that can be applied when prioritizing documents for updating. The most frequently cited criteria were as follows: available evidence (19 of 76, 25.0%), clinical relevance (10 of 76; 13.2%), and users' interest (10 of 76; 13.2%). There is wide variability and suboptimal reporting of the methods used to develop and implement processes to prioritize updating of SRs, HTAs, and CGs. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Impact of searching clinical trial registries in systematic reviews of pharmaceutical treatments: methodological systematic review and reanalysis of meta-analyses.

PubMed

Baudard, Marie; Yavchitz, Amélie; Ravaud, Philippe; Perrodeau, Elodie; Boutron, Isabelle

2017-02-17

Objective  To evaluate the impact of searching clinical trial registries in systematic reviews. Design  Methodological systematic review and reanalyses of meta-analyses. Data sources  Medline was searched to identify systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing pharmaceutical treatments published between June 2014 and January 2015. For all systematic reviews that did not report a trial registry search but reported the information to perform it, the World Health Organization International Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP search portal) was searched for completed or terminated RCTs not originally included in the systematic review. Data extraction  For each systematic review, two researchers independently extracted the outcomes analysed, the number of patients included, and the treatment effect estimated. For each RCT identified, two researchers independently determined whether the results were available (ie, posted, published, or available on the sponsor website) and extracted the data. When additional data were retrieved, we reanalysed meta-analyses and calculated the weight of the additional RCTs and the change in summary statistics by comparison with the original meta-analysis. Results  Among 223 selected systematic reviews, 116 (52%) did not report a search of trial registries; 21 of these did not report the information to perform the search (key words, search date). A search was performed for 95 systematic reviews; for 54 (57%), no additional RCTs were found and for 41 (43%) 122 additional RCTs were identified. The search allowed for increasing the number of patients by more than 10% in 19 systematic reviews, 20% in 10, 30% in seven, and 50% in four. Moreover, 63 RCTs had results available; the results for 45 could be included in a meta-analysis. 14 systematic reviews including 45 RCTs were reanalysed. The weight of the additional RCTs in the recalculated meta-analyses ranged from 0% to 58% and was greater than 10% in five of 14

Identifying clinical criteria to predict Type 1 diabetes, as defined by absolute insulin deficiency: a systematic review protocol.

PubMed

Shields, Beverley M; Peters, Jaime L; Cooper, Chris; Powell, Roy J; Knight, Bridget A; Hyde, Christopher; Hattersley, Andrew T

2012-01-01

Management of a patient's diabetes is entirely dependent upon the type of diabetes they are deemed to have. Patients with Type 1 diabetes are insulin deficient so require multiple daily insulin injections, whereas patients with Type 2 diabetes still have some endogenous insulin production so insulin treatment is only required when diet and tablets do not establish good glycaemic control. Despite the importance of a correct diagnosis, classification of diabetes is based on aetiology and relies on clinical judgement. There are no clinical guidelines on how to determine whether a patient has Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes. We aim to systematically review the literature to derive evidence-based clinical criteria for the classification of the major subtypes of diabetes. We will perform a systematic review of diagnostic accuracy studies to establish clinical criteria that predict the subsequent development of absolute insulin deficiency seen in Type 1 diabetes. Insulin deficiency will be determined by reference standard C-peptide concentrations. Synthesis of criteria identified will be undertaken using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves. As this is a systematic review, there will be no ethical issues. We will disseminate results by writing up the final systematic review and synthesis for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and will present at national and international diabetes-related meetings.

Search strategies to identify information on adverse effects: a systematic review

PubMed Central

Golder, Su; Loke, Yoon

2009-01-01

Objectives: The review evaluated studies of electronic database search strategies designed to retrieve adverse effects data for systematic reviews. Methods: Studies of adverse effects were located in ten databases as well as by checking references, hand-searching, searching citations, and contacting experts. Two reviewers screened the retrieved records for potentially relevant papers. Results: Five thousand three hundred thirteen citations were retrieved, yielding 19 studies designed to develop or evaluate adverse effect filters, of which 3 met the inclusion criteria. All 3 studies identified highly sensitive search strategies capable of retrieving over 95% of relevant records. However, 1 study did not evaluate precision, while the level of precision in the other 2 studies ranged from 0.8% to 2.8%. Methodological issues in these papers included the relatively small number of records, absence of a validation set of records for testing, and limited evaluation of precision. Conclusions: The results indicate the difficulty of achieving highly sensitive searches for information on adverse effects with a reasonable level of precision. Researchers who intend to locate studies on adverse effects should allow for the amount of resources and time required to conduct a highly sensitive search. PMID:19404498

A primer on systematic reviews in toxicology.

PubMed

Hoffmann, Sebastian; de Vries, Rob B M; Stephens, Martin L; Beck, Nancy B; Dirven, Hubert A A M; Fowle, John R; Goodman, Julie E; Hartung, Thomas; Kimber, Ian; Lalu, Manoj M; Thayer, Kristina; Whaley, Paul; Wikoff, Daniele; Tsaioun, Katya

2017-07-01

Systematic reviews, pioneered in the clinical field, provide a transparent, methodologically rigorous and reproducible means of summarizing the available evidence on a precisely framed research question. Having matured to a well-established approach in many research fields, systematic reviews are receiving increasing attention as a potential tool for answering toxicological questions. In the larger framework of evidence-based toxicology, the advantages and obstacles of, as well as the approaches for, adapting and adopting systematic reviews to toxicology are still being explored. To provide the toxicology community with a starting point for conducting or understanding systematic reviews, we herein summarized available guidance documents from various fields of application. We have elaborated on the systematic review process by breaking it down into ten steps, starting with planning the project, framing the question, and writing and publishing the protocol, and concluding with interpretation and reporting. In addition, we have identified the specific methodological challenges of toxicological questions and have summarized how these can be addressed. Ultimately, this primer is intended to stimulate scientific discussions of the identified issues to fuel the development of toxicology-specific methodology and to encourage the application of systematic review methodology to toxicological issues.

Identifying Resilience Resources for HIV Prevention Among Sexual Minority Men: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Woodward, Eva N; Banks, Regina J; Marks, Amy K; Pantalone, David W

2017-10-01

Most HIV prevention for sexual minority men and men who have sex with men targets risk behaviors (e.g., condom use) and helps <50% of participants. Bolstering resilience might increase HIV prevention's effectiveness. This systematic review identified resilience resources (protective factors) in high-risk, HIV-negative, sexual minority men. We reviewed PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, MEDLINE, references, and Listservs for studies including sexual minority men with 1+ HIV risk factor (syndemics): childhood sexual abuse, partner abuse, substance abuse, or mental health symptoms. From 1356 articles screened, 20 articles met inclusion criteria. Across the articles, we identified and codified 31 resilience resources: socioeconomic (e.g., employment), behavioral coping strategies (e.g., mental health treatment), cognitions/emotions (e.g., acceptance), and relationships. Resilience resources were generally associated with lower HIV risk; there were 18 low-risk associations, 4 high-risk associations, 8 non-significant associations). We generated a set of empirically based resilience variables and a hypothesis to be evaluated further to improve HIV prevention.

USDA Nutrition Evidence Library: methodology used to identify topics and develop systematic review questions for the birth-to-24-mo population.

PubMed

Obbagy, Julie E; Blum-Kemelor, Donna M; Essery, Eve V; Lyon, Joan M G; Spahn, Joanne M

2014-03-01

The USDA's Nutrition Evidence Library (NEL) specializes in conducting food- and nutrition-related systematic reviews that are used to inform federal government decision making. To ensure the utility of NEL systematic reviews, the most relevant topics must be addressed, questions must be clearly focused and appropriate in scope, and review frameworks must reflect the state of the science. Identifying the optimal topics and questions requires input from a variety of stakeholders, including scientists with technical expertise, as well as government policy and program leaders. The objective of this article is to describe the rationale and NEL methodology for identifying topics and developing systematic review questions implemented as part of the "Evaluating the evidence base to support the inclusion of infants and children from birth to 24 months of age in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans--the B-24 Project." This is the first phase of a larger project designed to develop dietary guidance for the birth to 24-mo population in the United States.

Using Multiple Types of Studies in Systematic Reviews of Health Care Interventions – A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Peinemann, Frank; Tushabe, Doreen Allen; Kleijnen, Jos

2013-01-01

Background A systematic review may evaluate different aspects of a health care intervention. To accommodate the evaluation of various research questions, the inclusion of more than one study design may be necessary. One aim of this study is to find and describe articles on methodological issues concerning the incorporation of multiple types of study designs in systematic reviews on health care interventions. Another aim is to evaluate methods studies that have assessed whether reported effects differ by study types. Methods and Findings We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Cochrane Methodology Register on 31 March 2012 and identified 42 articles that reported on the integration of single or multiple study designs in systematic reviews. We summarized the contents of the articles qualitatively and assessed theoretical and empirical evidence. We found that many examples of reviews incorporating multiple types of studies exist and that every study design can serve a specific purpose. The clinical questions of a systematic review determine the types of design that are necessary or sufficient to provide the best possible answers. In a second independent search, we identified 49 studies, 31 systematic reviews and 18 trials that compared the effect sizes between randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials, which were statistically different in 35%, and not different in 53%. Twelve percent of studies reported both, different and non-different effect sizes. Conclusions Different study designs addressing the same question yielded varying results, with differences in about half of all examples. The risk of presenting uncertain results without knowing for sure the direction and magnitude of the effect holds true for both nonrandomized and randomized controlled trials. The integration of multiple study designs in systematic reviews is required if patients should be informed on the many facets of patient relevant issues of health care

Global cardiovascular risk assessment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in adults: systematic review of systematic reviews

PubMed Central

Tompson, Alice C; Onakpoya, Igho J; Roberts, Nia; Ward, Alison M; Heneghan, Carl J

2017-01-01

Objective To identify, critically appraise and summarise existing systematic reviews on the impact of global cardiovascular risk assessment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in adults. Design Systematic review of systematic reviews published between January 2005 and October 2016 in The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE or CINAHL databases, and post hoc analysis of primary trials. Participants, interventions, outcomes Systematic reviews of interventions involving global cardiovascular risk assessment relative to no formal risk assessment in adults with no history of CVD. The primary outcomes of interest were CVD-related morbidity and mortality and all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP), cholesterol and smoking. Results We identified six systematic reviews of variable but generally of low quality (mean Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 4.2/11, range 0/11 to 7/11). No studies identified by the systematic reviews reported CVD-related morbidity or mortality or all-cause mortality. Meta-analysis of reported randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed small reductions in SBP (mean difference (MD) −2.22 mm Hg (95% CI −3.49 to −0.95); I2=66%; n=9; GRADE: very low), total cholesterol (MD −0.11 mmol/L (95% CI −0.20 to −0.02); I2=72%; n=5; GRADE: very low), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD −0.15 mmol/L (95% CI −0.26 to −0.05), I2=47%; n=4; GRADE: very low) and smoking cessation (RR 1.62 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.43); I2=17%; n=7; GRADE: low). The median follow-up time of reported RCTs was 12 months (range 2–36 months). Conclusions The quality of existing systematic reviews was generally poor and there is currently no evidence reported in these reviews that the prospective use of global cardiovascular risk assessment translates to reductions in CVD morbidity or mortality. There are reductions in SBP, cholesterol and smoking but they may not be clinically

Dissemination Bias in Systematic Reviews of Animal Research: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Mueller, Katharina F.; Briel, Matthias; Strech, Daniel; Meerpohl, Joerg J.; Lang, Britta; Motschall, Edith; Gloy, Viktoria; Lamontagne, Francois; Bassler, Dirk

2014-01-01

Background Systematic reviews of preclinical studies, in vivo animal experiments in particular, can influence clinical research and thus even clinical care. Dissemination bias, selective dissemination of positive or significant results, is one of the major threats to validity in systematic reviews also in the realm of animal studies. We conducted a systematic review to determine the number of published systematic reviews of animal studies until present, to investigate their methodological features especially with respect to assessment of dissemination bias, and to investigate the citation of preclinical systematic reviews on clinical research. Methods Eligible studies for this systematic review constitute systematic reviews that summarize in vivo animal experiments whose results could be interpreted as applicable to clinical care. We systematically searched Ovid Medline, Embase, ToxNet, and ScienceDirect from 1st January 2009 to 9th January 2013 for eligible systematic reviews without language restrictions. Furthermore we included articles from two previous systematic reviews by Peters et al. and Korevaar et al. Results The literature search and screening process resulted in 512 included full text articles. We found an increasing number of published preclinical systematic reviews over time. The methodological quality of preclinical systematic reviews was low. The majority of preclinical systematic reviews did not assess methodological quality of the included studies (71%), nor did they assess heterogeneity (81%) or dissemination bias (87%). Statistics quantifying the importance of clinical research citing systematic reviews of animal studies showed that clinical studies referred to the preclinical research mainly to justify their study or a future study (76%). Discussion Preclinical systematic reviews may have an influence on clinical research but their methodological quality frequently remains low. Therefore, systematic reviews of animal research should be

Mobile text messaging for health: a systematic review of reviews.

PubMed

Hall, Amanda K; Cole-Lewis, Heather; Bernhardt, Jay M

2015-03-18

The aim of this systematic review of reviews is to identify mobile text-messaging interventions designed for health improvement and behavior change and to derive recommendations for practice. We have compiled and reviewed existing systematic research reviews and meta-analyses to organize and summarize the text-messaging intervention evidence base, identify best-practice recommendations based on findings from multiple reviews, and explore implications for future research. Our review found that the majority of published text-messaging interventions were effective when addressing diabetes self-management, weight loss, physical activity, smoking cessation, and medication adherence for antiretroviral therapy. However, we found limited evidence across the population of studies and reviews to inform recommended intervention characteristics. Although strong evidence supports the value of integrating text-messaging interventions into public health practice, additional research is needed to establish longer-term intervention effects, identify recommended intervention characteristics, and explore issues of cost-effectiveness.

Mobile Text Messaging for Health: A Systematic Review of Reviews

PubMed Central

Hall, Amanda K.; Cole-Lewis, Heather; Bernhardt, Jay M.

2015-01-01

The aim of this systematic review of reviews is to identify mobile text-messaging interventions designed for health improvement and behavior change and to derive recommendations for practice. We have compiled and reviewed existing systematic research reviews and meta-analyses to organize and summarize the text-messaging intervention evidence base, identify best-practice recommendations based on findings from multiple reviews, and explore implications for future research. Our review found that the majority of published text-messaging interventions were effective when addressing diabetes self-management, weight loss, physical activity, smoking cessation, and medication adherence for antiretroviral therapy. However, we found limited evidence across the population of studies and reviews to inform recommended intervention characteristics. Although strong evidence supports the value of integrating text-messaging interventions into public health practice, additional research is needed to establish longer-term intervention effects, identify recommended intervention characteristics, and explore issues of cost-effectiveness. PMID:25785892

Fluoropyrimidine and platinum toxicity pharmacogenetics: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

PubMed

Campbell, Jared M; Bateman, Emma; Peters, Micah Dj; Bowen, Joanne M; Keefe, Dorothy M; Stephenson, Matthew D

2016-03-01

Fluoropyrimidine (FU) and platinum-based chemotherapies are greatly complicated by their associated toxicities. This umbrella systematic review synthesized all systematic reviews that investigated associations between germline variations and toxicity, with the aim of informing personalized medicine. Systematic reviews are important in pharmacogenetics where false positives are common. Four systematic reviews were identified for FU-induced toxicity and three for platinum. Polymorphisms of DPYD and TYMS, but not MTHFR, were statistically significantly associated with FU-induced toxicity (although only DPYD had clinical significance). For platinum, GSTP1 was found to not be associated with toxicity. This umbrella systematic review has synthesized the best available evidence on the pharmacogenetics of FU and platinum toxicity. It provides a useful reference for clinicians and identifies important research gaps.

Methodology of a systematic review.

PubMed

Linares-Espinós, E; Hernández, V; Domínguez-Escrig, J L; Fernández-Pello, S; Hevia, V; Mayor, J; Padilla-Fernández, B; Ribal, M J

2018-05-03

The objective of evidence-based medicine is to employ the best scientific information available to apply to clinical practice. Understanding and interpreting the scientific evidence involves understanding the available levels of evidence, where systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical trials are at the top of the levels-of-evidence pyramid. The review process should be well developed and planned to reduce biases and eliminate irrelevant and low-quality studies. The steps for implementing a systematic review include (i) correctly formulating the clinical question to answer (PICO), (ii) developing a protocol (inclusion and exclusion criteria), (iii) performing a detailed and broad literature search and (iv) screening the abstracts of the studies identified in the search and subsequently of the selected complete texts (PRISMA). Once the studies have been selected, we need to (v) extract the necessary data into a form designed in the protocol to summarise the included studies, (vi) assess the biases of each study, identifying the quality of the available evidence, and (vii) develop tables and text that synthesise the evidence. A systematic review involves a critical and reproducible summary of the results of the available publications on a particular topic or clinical question. To improve scientific writing, the methodology is shown in a structured manner to implement a systematic review. Copyright © 2018 AEU. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Research gaps identified during systematic reviews of clinical trials: glass-ionomer cements.

PubMed

Mickenautsch, Steffen

2012-06-29

To report the results of an audit concerning research gaps in clinical trials that were accepted for appraisal in authored and published systematic reviews regarding the application of glass-ionomer cements (GIC) in dental practice Information concerning research gaps in trial precision was extracted, following a framework that included classification of the research gap reasons: 'imprecision of information (results)', 'biased information', 'inconsistency or unknown consistency' and 'not the right information', as well as research gap characterization using PICOS elements: population (P), intervention (I), comparison (C), outcomes (O) and setting (S). Internal trial validity assessment was based on the understanding that successful control for systematic error cannot be assured on the basis of inclusion of adequate methods alone, but also requires empirical evidence about whether such attempt was successful. A comprehensive and interconnected coverage of GIC-related clinical topics was established. The most common reasons found for gaps in trial precision were lack of sufficient trials and lack of sufficient large sample size. Only a few research gaps were ascribed to 'Lack of information' caused by focus on mainly surrogate trial outcomes. According to the chosen assessment criteria, a lack of adequate randomisation, allocation concealment and blinding/masking in trials covering all reviewed GIC topics was noted (selection- and detection/performance bias risk). Trial results appear to be less affected by loss-to-follow-up (attrition bias risk). This audit represents an adjunct of the systematic review articles it has covered. Its results do not change the systematic review's conclusions but highlight existing research gaps concerning the precision and internal validity of reviewed trials in detail. These gaps should be addressed in future GIC-related clinical research.

Systematic reviews need systematic searchers

PubMed Central

McGowan, Jessie; Sampson, Margaret

2005-01-01

Purpose: This paper will provide a description of the methods, skills, and knowledge of expert searchers working on systematic review teams. Brief Description: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are very important to health care practitioners, who need to keep abreast of the medical literature and make informed decisions. Searching is a critical part of conducting these systematic reviews, as errors made in the search process potentially result in a biased or otherwise incomplete evidence base for the review. Searches for systematic reviews need to be constructed to maximize recall and deal effectively with a number of potentially biasing factors. Librarians who conduct the searches for systematic reviews must be experts. Discussion/Conclusion: Expert searchers need to understand the specifics about data structure and functions of bibliographic and specialized databases, as well as the technical and methodological issues of searching. Search methodology must be based on research about retrieval practices, and it is vital that expert searchers keep informed about, advocate for, and, moreover, conduct research in information retrieval. Expert searchers are an important part of the systematic review team, crucial throughout the review process—from the development of the proposal and research question to publication. PMID:15685278

Global cardiovascular risk assessment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in adults: systematic review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Collins, Dylan R J; Tompson, Alice C; Onakpoya, Igho J; Roberts, Nia; Ward, Alison M; Heneghan, Carl J

2017-03-24

To identify, critically appraise and summarise existing systematic reviews on the impact of global cardiovascular risk assessment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in adults. Systematic review of systematic reviews published between January 2005 and October 2016 in The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE or CINAHL databases, and post hoc analysis of primary trials. Systematic reviews of interventions involving global cardiovascular risk assessment relative to no formal risk assessment in adults with no history of CVD. The primary outcomes of interest were CVD-related morbidity and mortality and all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were systolic blood pressure (SBP), cholesterol and smoking. We identified six systematic reviews of variable but generally of low quality (mean Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 4.2/11, range 0/11 to 7/11). No studies identified by the systematic reviews reported CVD-related morbidity or mortality or all-cause mortality. Meta-analysis of reported randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed small reductions in SBP (mean difference (MD) -2.22 mm Hg (95% CI -3.49 to -0.95); I 2 =66%; n=9; GRADE: very low), total cholesterol (MD -0.11 mmol/L (95% CI -0.20 to -0.02); I 2 =72%; n=5; GRADE: very low), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD -0.15 mmol/L (95% CI -0.26 to -0.05), I 2 =47%; n=4; GRADE: very low) and smoking cessation (RR 1.62 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.43); I 2 =17%; n=7; GRADE: low). The median follow-up time of reported RCTs was 12 months (range 2-36 months). The quality of existing systematic reviews was generally poor and there is currently no evidence reported in these reviews that the prospective use of global cardiovascular risk assessment translates to reductions in CVD morbidity or mortality. There are reductions in SBP, cholesterol and smoking but they may not be clinically significant given their small effect size and short duration. Resources need to be directed to

Systematic Reviews in Sports Medicine.

PubMed

DiSilvestro, Kevin J; Tjoumakaris, Fotios P; Maltenfort, Mitchell G; Spindler, Kurt P; Freedman, Kevin B

2016-02-01

The number of systematic reviews published in the orthopaedic literature has increased, and these reviews can help guide clinical decision making. However, the quality of these reviews can affect the reader's ability to use the data to arrive at accurate conclusions and make clinical decisions. To evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the sports medicine literature to determine whether such reviews should be used to guide treatment decisions. The hypothesis was that many systematic reviews in the orthopaedic sports medicine literature may not follow the appropriate reporting guidelines or methodological criteria recommended for systematic reviews. Systematic review. All clinical sports medicine systematic reviews and meta-analyses from 2009 to 2013 published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM), The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS), Arthroscopy, Sports Health, and Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy (KSSTA) were reviewed and evaluated for level of evidence according to the guidelines from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, for reporting quality according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, and for methodological quality according to the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool. Analysis was performed by year and journal of publication, and the levels of evidence included in the systematic reviews were also analyzed. A total of 200 systematic reviews and meta-analyses were identified over the study period. Of these, 53% included evidence levels 4 and 5 in their analyses, with just 32% including evidence levels 1 and 2 only. There were significant differences in the proportion of articles with high levels of evidence (P < .001) and low levels of evidence (P = .005) by journal. The average PRISMA score was 87% and the average AMSTAR score was 73% among all journals. The average AMSTAR and PRISMA

Identifying characteristics and practices of multidisciplinary team reviews for patients with severe mental illness: a systematic review.

PubMed

Woody, Charlotte A; Baxter, Amanda J; Harris, Meredith G; Siskind, Dan J; Whiteford, Harvey A

2018-06-01

Multidisciplinary teams in mental health receive limited guidance, leading to inconsistent practices. We undertook a systematic review of the characteristics and practices of multidisciplinary team reviews for patients with severe mental illness or in relevant mental health service settings. Sources published since 2000 were located via academic database and web searches. Results were synthesised narratively. A total of 14 sources were analysed. Important characteristics and practices identified included routine monitoring and evaluation, good communication, equality between team members, and clear documentation practices. Success factors included defined leadership and clear team goals. Four sources described considerations for patients with complex clinical needs, including allocating sufficient time for discussion, maintaining connections with community providers, and ensuring culturally sensitive practices. No single best practice model was found, due to variations in team caseload, casemix, and resourcing levels. However, key ingredients for success were proposed. Sources were mostly descriptive; there remains a lack of evidence-based guidance regarding multidisciplinary team review characteristics and practices.

Quality of search strategies reported in systematic reviews published in stereotactic radiosurgery.

PubMed

Faggion, Clovis M; Wu, Yun-Chun; Tu, Yu-Kang; Wasiak, Jason

2016-06-01

Systematic reviews require comprehensive literature search strategies to avoid publication bias. This study aimed to assess and evaluate the reporting quality of search strategies within systematic reviews published in the field of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Three electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE(®), Ovid EMBASE(®) and the Cochrane Library) were searched to identify systematic reviews addressing SRS interventions, with the last search performed in October 2014. Manual searches of the reference lists of included systematic reviews were conducted. The search strategies of the included systematic reviews were assessed using a standardized nine-question form based on the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews checklist. Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to identify the important predictors of search quality. A total of 85 systematic reviews were included. The median quality score of search strategies was 2 (interquartile range = 2). Whilst 89% of systematic reviews reported the use of search terms, only 14% of systematic reviews reported searching the grey literature. Multiple linear regression analyses identified publication year (continuous variable), meta-analysis performance and journal impact factor (continuous variable) as predictors of higher mean quality scores. This study identified the urgent need to improve the quality of search strategies within systematic reviews published in the field of SRS. This study is the first to address how authors performed searches to select clinical studies for inclusion in their systematic reviews. Comprehensive and well-implemented search strategies are pivotal to reduce the chance of publication bias and consequently generate more reliable systematic review findings.

Stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews: a protocol for a systematic review of methods, outcomes and effects.

PubMed

Pollock, Alex; Campbell, Pauline; Struthers, Caroline; Synnot, Anneliese; Nunn, Jack; Hill, Sophie; Goodare, Heather; Watts, Chris; Morley, Richard

2017-01-01

Researchers are expected to actively involve stakeholders (including patients, the public, health professionals, and others) in their research. Although researchers increasingly recognise that this is good practice, there is limited practical guidance about how to involve stakeholders. Systematic reviews are a research method in which international literature is brought together, using carefully designed and rigorous methods to answer a specified question about healthcare. We want to investigate how researchers have involved stakeholders in systematic reviews, and how involvement has potentially affected the quality and impact of reviews. We plan to bring this information together by searching and reviewing the literature for reports of stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews. This paper describes in detail the methods that we plan to use to do this. After carrying out comprehensive searches for literature, we will: 1. Provide an overview of identified reports, describing key information such as types of stakeholders involved, and how. 2. Pick out reports of involvement which include detailed descriptions of how researchers involved people in a systematic review and summarise the methods they used. We will consider who was involved, how people were recruited, and how the involvement was organised and managed. 3. Bring together any reports which have explored the effect, or impact, of involving stakeholders in a systematic review. We will assess the quality of these reports, and summarise their findings. Once completed, our review will be used to produce training resources aimed at helping researchers to improve ways of involving stakeholders in systematic reviews. Background There is an expectation for stakeholders (including patients, the public, health professionals, and others) to be involved in research. Researchers are increasingly recognising that it is good practice to involve stakeholders in systematic reviews. There is currently a lack of evidence

Maximizing the Impact of Systematic Reviews in Health Care Decision Making: A Systematic Scoping Review of Knowledge-Translation Resources

PubMed Central

Chambers, Duncan; Wilson, Paul M; Thompson, Carl A; Hanbury, Andria; Farley, Katherine; Light, Kate

2011-01-01

Context: Barriers to the use of systematic reviews by policymakers may be overcome by resources that adapt and present the findings in formats more directly tailored to their needs. We performed a systematic scoping review to identify such knowledge-translation resources and evaluations of them. Methods: Resources were eligible for inclusion in this study if they were based exclusively or primarily on systematic reviews and were aimed at health care policymakers at the national or local level. Resources were identified by screening the websites of health technology assessment agencies and systematic review producers, supplemented by an email survey. Electronic databases and proceedings of the Cochrane Colloquium and HTA International were searched as well for published and unpublished evaluations of knowledge-translation resources. Resources were classified as summaries, overviews, or policy briefs using a previously published classification. Findings: Twenty knowledge-translation resources were identified, of which eleven were classified as summaries, six as overviews, and three as policy briefs. Resources added value to systematic reviews by, for example, evaluating their methodological quality or assessing the reliability of their conclusions or their generalizability to particular settings. The literature search found four published evaluation studies of knowledge-translation resources, and the screening of abstracts and contact with authors found three more unpublished studies. The majority of studies reported on the perceived usefulness of the service, although there were some examples of review-based resources being used to assist actual decision making. Conclusions: Systematic review producers provide a variety of resources to help policymakers, of which focused summaries are the most common. More evaluations of these resources are required to ensure users’ needs are being met, to demonstrate their impact, and to justify their funding. PMID:21418315

A Critical Review of Search Strategies Used in Recent Systematic Reviews Published in Selected Prosthodontic and Implant-Related Journals: Are Systematic Reviews Actually Systematic?

PubMed

Layton, Danielle

The aim of this study was to outline how search strategies can be systematic, to examine how the searches in recent systematic reviews in prosthodontic and implant-related journals were structured, and to determine whether the search strategies used in those articles were systematic. A total of 103 articles published as systematic reviews and indexed in Medline between January 2013 and May 2016 were identified from eight prosthodontic and implant journals and reviewed. The search strategies were considered systematic when they met the following criteria: (1) more than one electronic database was searched, (2) more than one searcher was clearly involved, (3) both text words and indexing terms were clearly included in the search strategy, (4) a hand search of selected journals or reference lists was undertaken, (5) gray research was specifically sought, and (6) the articles were published in English and at least one other language. The data were tallied and qualitatively assessed. The majority of articles reported on implants (54%), followed by tooth-supported fixed prosthodontics (13%). A total of 23 different electronic resources were consulted, including Medline (by 100% of articles), the Cochrane Library (52%), and Embase (37%). The majority consulted more than one electronic resource (71%), clearly included more than one searcher (73%), and employed a hand search of either selected journals or reference lists (86%). Less than half used both text words and indexing terms to identify articles (42%), while 15% actively sought gray research. Articles published in languages other than English were considered in 63 reviews, but only 14 had no language restrictions. Of the 103 articles, 5 completed search strategies that met all 6 criteria, and a further 12 met 5 criteria. Two articles did not fulfill any of the criteria. More than 95% of recent prosthodontic and implant review articles published in the selected journals failed to use search strategies that were

Health literacy in type 2 diabetes patients: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Caruso, Rosario; Magon, Arianna; Baroni, Irene; Dellafiore, Federica; Arrigoni, Cristina; Pittella, Francesco; Ausili, Davide

2018-01-01

Aim To summarize, critically review, and interpret the evidence related to the systematic reviews on health literacy (HL) amongst type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods The methodology for this study consisted of a systematic review of systematic reviews, using the PRISMA statement and flowchart to select studies, and searching on PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Cochrane. The search covered the period between January 2006 and June 2016. Results From the 115 identified record by the queries, only six systematic reviews were included, following a quality evaluation using AMSTAR. The included systematic reviews content was analyzed by the independent work of two authors, using a narrative synthesis approach. The findings of this study (i.e., main themes) are areas of consensus and gaps in knowledge. Areas of consensus are HL definition, HL measurement tools, and the relationship between T2DM patient knowledge (or literacy) and his/her HL. The gaps in knowledge were the assessment of the relations between HL and health outcomes and self-efficacy, the gender differences, the effectiveness of interventions to improve HL, the cost-effectiveness study of interventions to improve HL, and the understanding of the influence of organizational environment on HL. Conclusion This review provides a current state of knowledge to address clinical practice and research proposals. HL could be useful to personalize patients' follow-up and it should be routinely assessed in its three dimensions (i.e. functional, interactive and critical) to enhance patients' ability to cope with clinical recommendations. Future research should be mainly aimed to test the effectiveness of evidence-based interventions to improve HL amongst T2DM patients.

A Primer on Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

PubMed

Nguyen, Nghia H; Singh, Siddharth

2018-05-01

With the rapid growth of biomedical literature, there is increasing need to make meaningful inferences from a comprehensive and complex body of evidence. Systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses offer an objective and summative approach to synthesize knowledge and critically appraise evidence to inform clinical practice. Systematic reviews also help identify key knowledge gaps for future investigation. In this review, the authors provide a step-by-step approach to conducting a systematic review. These include: (1) formulating a focused and clinically-relevant question; (2) designing a detailed review protocol with explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria; (3) performing a systematic literature search of multiple databases and unpublished data, in consultation with a medical librarian, to identify relevant studies; (4) meticulous data abstraction by at least two sets of investigators independently; (5) assessing risk of bias in individual studies; (6) quantitative synthesis with meta-analysis; and (7) critically and transparently ascertaining quality of evidence. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Barriers to the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a systematic review of decision makers’ perceptions

PubMed Central

Wallace, John; Nwosu, Bosah; Clarke, Mike

2012-01-01

Objective To review the barriers to the uptake of research evidence from systematic reviews by decision makers. Search strategy We searched 19 databases covering the full range of publication years, utilised three search engines and also personally contacted investigators. Reference lists of primary studies and related reviews were also consulted. Selection criteria Studies were included if they reported on the views and perceptions of decision makers on the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews, meta-analyses and the databases associated with them. All study designs, settings and decision makers were included. One investigator screened titles to identify candidate articles then two reviewers independently assessed the quality and the relevance of retrieved reports. Data extraction Two reviewers described the methods of included studies and extracted data that were summarised in tables and then analysed. Using a pre-established taxonomy, the barriers were organised into a framework according to their effect on knowledge, attitudes or behaviour. Results Of 1726 articles initially identified, we selected 27 unique published studies describing at least one barrier to the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews. These studies included a total of 25 surveys and 2 qualitative studies. Overall, the majority of participants (n=10 218) were physicians (64%). The most commonly investigated barriers were lack of use (14/25), lack of awareness (12/25), lack of access (11/25), lack of familiarity (7/25), lack of usefulness (7/25), lack of motivation (4/25) and external barriers (5/25). Conclusions This systematic review reveals that strategies to improve the uptake of evidence from reviews and meta-analyses will need to overcome a wide variety of obstacles. Our review describes the reasons why knowledge users, especially physicians, do not call on systematic reviews. This study can inform future approaches to enhancing systematic review uptake and also suggests

Effectiveness of Pilates exercise in treating people with chronic low back pain: a systematic review of systematic reviews

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Background Systematic reviews provide clinical practice recommendations that are based on evaluation of primary evidence. When systematic reviews with the same aims have different conclusions, it is difficult to ascertain which review reported the most credible and robust findings. Methods This study examined five systematic reviews that have investigated the effectiveness of Pilates exercise in people with chronic low back pain. A four-stage process was used to interpret findings of the reviews. This process included comparison of research questions, included primary studies, and the level and quality of evidence of systematic reviews. Two independent reviewers assessed the level of evidence and the methodological quality of systematic reviews, using the National Health and Medical Research Council hierarchy of evidence, and the Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews respectively. Any disagreements were resolved by a third researcher. Results A high level of consensus was achieved between the reviewers. Conflicting findings were reported by the five systematic reviews regarding the effectiveness of Pilates in reducing pain and disability in people with chronic low back pain. Authors of the systematic reviews included primary studies that did not match their questions in relation to treatment or population characteristics. A total of ten primary studies were identified across five systematic reviews. Only two of the primary studies were included in all of the reviews due to different inclusion criteria relating to publication date and status, definition of Pilates, and methodological quality. The level of evidence of reviews was low due to the methodological design of the primary studies. The methodological quality of reviews varied. Those which conducted a meta-analysis obtained higher scores. Conclusion There is inconclusive evidence that Pilates is effective in reducing pain and disability in people with chronic low back pain. This is due to the small

Effectiveness of Pilates exercise in treating people with chronic low back pain: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Wells, Cherie; Kolt, Gregory S; Marshall, Paul; Hill, Bridget; Bialocerkowski, Andrea

2013-01-19

Systematic reviews provide clinical practice recommendations that are based on evaluation of primary evidence. When systematic reviews with the same aims have different conclusions, it is difficult to ascertain which review reported the most credible and robust findings. This study examined five systematic reviews that have investigated the effectiveness of Pilates exercise in people with chronic low back pain. A four-stage process was used to interpret findings of the reviews. This process included comparison of research questions, included primary studies, and the level and quality of evidence of systematic reviews. Two independent reviewers assessed the level of evidence and the methodological quality of systematic reviews, using the National Health and Medical Research Council hierarchy of evidence, and the Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews respectively. Any disagreements were resolved by a third researcher. A high level of consensus was achieved between the reviewers. Conflicting findings were reported by the five systematic reviews regarding the effectiveness of Pilates in reducing pain and disability in people with chronic low back pain. Authors of the systematic reviews included primary studies that did not match their questions in relation to treatment or population characteristics. A total of ten primary studies were identified across five systematic reviews. Only two of the primary studies were included in all of the reviews due to different inclusion criteria relating to publication date and status, definition of Pilates, and methodological quality. The level of evidence of reviews was low due to the methodological design of the primary studies. The methodological quality of reviews varied. Those which conducted a meta-analysis obtained higher scores. There is inconclusive evidence that Pilates is effective in reducing pain and disability in people with chronic low back pain. This is due to the small number and poor methodological

[Characteristics of systematic reviews about the impact of pharmacists].

PubMed

Tanguay, C; Guérin, A; Bussières, J-F

2014-11-01

The pharmacists' role is varied and numerous articles evaluate the outcomes of pharmaceutical interventions. The main objectives of this study were to establish the characteristics of systematic reviews about pharmacists' interventions that were published in the last five years. A literature search was performed on Pubmed for French and English articles published between 01-01-2008 and 31-05-2013. Systematic reviews that presented the role, the interventions and the impact of pharmacists were selected by two research assistants. A total of 46 systematic reviews was identified, amongst which one third (n=15/46, 33 %) were meta-analyses. A quarter of systematic reviews did not evaluate the quality of included articles (n=13/46, 28 %). Twelve themes were identified. A median [min-max] of 16 [2-298] articles was included per systematic review. The most frequent pharmaceutical activities were patient counseling (n=41 systematic reviews), patient chart review (n=29), pharmacotherapy evaluation (n=27) and recommendations (n=26). The least frequent activities were teaching others than patients (n=12) and medical rounds participation (n=7). Many elements can influence the completion of pharmacy practice research projects; however, there exists no link between the presence of systematic reviews and the importance of pharmacists in a given healthcare program. This study presents the characteristics of 46 systematic reviews about pharmacists interventions published since 2008. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Systematic reviews addressing microsurgical head and neck reconstruction.

PubMed

Momeni, Arash; Jacobson, Joshua Y; Lee, Gordon K

2015-01-01

Systematic reviews frequently form the basis for clinical decision making and guideline development. Yet, the quality of systematic reviews has been variable, thus raising concerns about the validity of their conclusions. In the current study, a quality analysis of systematic reviews was performed, addressing microsurgical head and neck reconstruction. A PubMed search was performed to identify all systematic reviews published up to and including December 2012 in 12 surgical journals. Two authors independently reviewed the literature and extracted data from the included reviews. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Quality assessment was performed using AMSTAR. The initial search retrieved 1020 articles. After screening titles and abstracts, 987 articles were excluded. Full-text review of the remaining 33 articles resulted in further exclusion of 18 articles, leaving 15 systematic reviews for final analysis. A marked increase in the number of published systematic reviews over time was noted (P = 0.07). The median AMSTAR score was 5, thus reflecting a "fair" quality. No evidence for improvement in methodological quality over time was noted. The trend to publish more systematic reviews in microsurgical head and neck reconstruction is encouraging. However, efforts are indicated to improve the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Familiarity with criteria of methodological quality is critical to ensure future improvements in the quality of systematic reviews conducted in microsurgery.

Current state of ethics literature synthesis: a systematic review of reviews.

PubMed

Mertz, Marcel; Kahrass, Hannes; Strech, Daniel

2016-10-03

Modern standards for evidence-based decision making in clinical care and public health still rely solely on eminence-based input when it comes to normative ethical considerations. Manuals for clinical guideline development or health technology assessment (HTA) do not explain how to search, analyze, and synthesize relevant normative information in a systematic and transparent manner. In the scientific literature, however, systematic or semi-systematic reviews of ethics literature already exist, and scholarly debate on their opportunities and limitations has recently bloomed. A systematic review was performed of all existing systematic or semi-systematic reviews for normative ethics literature on medical topics. The study further assessed how these reviews report on their methods for search, selection, analysis, and synthesis of ethics literature. We identified 84 reviews published between 1997 and 2015 in 65 different journals and demonstrated an increasing publication rate for this type of review. While most reviews reported on different aspects of search and selection methods, reporting was much less explicit for aspects of analysis and synthesis methods: 31 % did not fulfill any criteria related to the reporting of analysis methods; for example, only 25 % of the reviews reported the ethical approach needed to analyze and synthesize normative information. While reviews of ethics literature are increasingly published, their reporting quality for analysis and synthesis of normative information should be improved. Guiding questions are: What was the applied ethical approach and technical procedure for identifying and extracting the relevant normative information units? What method and procedure was employed for synthesizing normative information? Experts and stakeholders from bioethics, HTA, guideline development, health care professionals, and patient organizations should work together to further develop this area of evidence-based health care.

Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review

PubMed Central

Spencer, Angela J.; Eldredge, Jonathan D.

2018-01-01

Objective What roles do librarians and information professionals play in conducting systematic reviews? Librarians are increasingly called upon to be involved in systematic reviews, but no study has considered all the roles librarians can perform. This inventory of existing and emerging roles aids in defining librarians’ systematic reviews services. Methods For this scoping review, the authors conducted controlled vocabulary and text-word searches in the PubMed; Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts; and CINAHL databases. We separately searched for articles published in the Journal of the European Association for Health Information and Libraries, Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, the Journal of the Canadian Heath Libraries Association, and Hypothesis. We also text-word searched Medical Library Association annual meeting poster and paper abstracts. Results We identified 18 different roles filled by librarians and other information professionals in conducting systematic reviews from 310 different articles, book chapters, and presented papers and posters. Some roles were well known such as searching, source selection, and teaching. Other less documented roles included planning, question formulation, and peer review. We summarize these different roles and provide an accompanying bibliography of references for in-depth descriptions of these roles. Conclusion Librarians play central roles in systematic review teams, including roles that go beyond searching. This scoping review should encourage librarians who are fulfilling roles that are not captured here to document their roles in journal articles and poster and paper presentations. PMID:29339933

The difficulties of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Westgate, Martin J; Lindenmayer, David B

2017-10-01

The need for robust evidence to support conservation actions has driven the adoption of systematic approaches to research synthesis in ecology. However, applying systematic review to complex or open questions remains challenging, and this task is becoming more difficult as the quantity of scientific literature increases. We drew on the science of linguistics for guidance as to why the process of identifying and sorting information during systematic review remains so labor intensive, and to provide potential solutions. Several linguistic properties of peer-reviewed corpora-including nonrandom selection of review topics, small-world properties of semantic networks, and spatiotemporal variation in word meaning-greatly increase the effort needed to complete the systematic review process. Conversely, the resolution of these semantic complexities is a common motivation for narrative reviews, but this process is rarely enacted with the rigor applied during linguistic analysis. Therefore, linguistics provides a unifying framework for understanding some key challenges of systematic review and highlights 2 useful directions for future research. First, in cases where semantic complexity generates barriers to synthesis, ecologists should consider drawing on existing methods-such as natural language processing or the construction of research thesauri and ontologies-that provide tools for mapping and resolving that complexity. These tools could help individual researchers classify research material in a more robust manner and provide valuable guidance for future researchers on that topic. Second, a linguistic perspective highlights that scientific writing is a rich resource worthy of detailed study, an observation that can sometimes be lost during the search for data during systematic review or meta-analysis. For example, mapping semantic networks can reveal redundancy and complementarity among scientific concepts, leading to new insights and research questions. Consequently

The determinants and consequences of adult nursing staff turnover: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Halter, Mary; Boiko, Olga; Pelone, Ferruccio; Beighton, Carole; Harris, Ruth; Gale, Julia; Gourlay, Stephen; Drennan, Vari

2017-12-15

Nurses leaving their jobs and the profession are an issue of international concern, with supply-demand gaps for nurses reported to be widening. There is a large body of existing literature, much of which is already in review form. In order to advance the usefulness of the literature for nurse and human resource managers, we undertook an overview (review of systematic reviews). The aim of the overview was to identify high quality evidence of the determinants and consequences of turnover in adult nursing. Reviews were identified which were published between 1990 and January 2015 in English using electronic databases (the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, CINAHL plus and SCOPUS) and forward searching. All stages of the review were conducted in parallel by two reviewers. Reviews were quality appraised using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews and their findings narratively synthesised. Nine reviews were included. We found that the current evidence is incomplete and has a number of important limitations. However, a body of moderate quality review evidence does exist giving a picture of multiple determinants of turnover in adult nursing, with - at the individual level - nurse stress and dissatisfaction being important factors and -at the organisational level - managerial style and supervisory support factors holding most weight. The consequences of turnover are only described in economic terms, but are considered significant. In making a quality assessment of the review as well as considering the quality of the included primary studies and specificity in the outcomes they measure, the overview found that the evidence is not as definitive as previously presented from individual reviews. Further research is required, of rigorous research design, whether quantitative or qualitative, particularly against the outcome of actual turnover as opposed to intention to leave. PROSPERO Registration 17

Appropriateness of using a symbol to identify dementia and/or delirium: a systematic review.

PubMed

Hines, Sonia; Abbey, Jenny; Wilson, Jacinda; Sacre, Sandy

2009-01-01

Alzheimer's Australia contracted the Dementia Collaborative Research Centre - Consumers, Carers and Social Research to conduct a systematic review to explore the appropriateness of a symbol for dementia.The concept of a symbol for people with dementia was an outcome of the Alzheimer's Australia National Consumer Summit on Dementia held in Canberra in October 2005. People living with dementia and their carers identified that a national symbol would be helpful in order to encourage appropriate treatment of people with dementia.Funding was provided as part of the Australian Government's Dementia Initiative to Alzheimer's Australia to work in collaboration with the Queensland University of Technology and Catholic Health Australia to explore, through research, the viability and potential impact of such a symbol in a range of care settings. The main objective of this systematic review was to evaluate any published and unpublished evidence regarding the appropriateness of developing a symbol for dementia and/or delirium, which could be used in a variety of settings to indicate that a person has dementia and/or delirium. A literature search was performed using the following databases: Ageline, APAIS Health, CINAHL, Dissertations and Theses Abstracts, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycEXTRAS, PsycINFO, PsycArticles, Current Contents, LegalTrac, Health and Society, Sociological Abstracts, Family and Society, CINCH, and Hein Online databases. The reference lists of articles retrieved were hand searched, as well as a range of literature from health, legal, ethical and emergency services. Grey literature was searched for using a number of Internet sites, and personal email communication with authors of relevant studies and known researchers in the field was initiated. Papers were retrieved if they provided information about attitudes or perceptions towards the appropriateness of symbols, identifiers or alerts used to inform others that someone has dementia, delirium and/or another medical

Contribution of systematic reviews to management decisions.

PubMed

Cook, Carly N; Possingham, Hugh P; Fuller, Richard A

2013-10-01

Systematic reviews comprehensively summarize evidence about the effectiveness of conservation interventions. We investigated the contribution to management decisions made by this growing body of literature. We identified 43 systematic reviews of conservation evidence, 23 of which drew some concrete conclusions relevant to management. Most reviews addressed conservation interventions relevant to policy decisions; only 35% considered practical on-the-ground management interventions. The majority of reviews covered only a small fraction of the geographic and taxonomic breadth they aimed to address (median = 13% of relevant countries and 16% of relevant taxa). The likelihood that reviews contained at least some implications for management tended to increase as geographic coverage increased and to decline as taxonomic breadth increased. These results suggest the breadth of a systematic review requires careful consideration. Reviews identified a mean of 312 relevant primary studies but excluded 88% of these because of deficiencies in design or a failure to meet other inclusion criteria. Reviews summarized on average 284 data sets and 112 years of research activity, yet the likelihood that their results had at least some implications for management did not increase as the amount of primary research summarized increased. In some cases, conclusions were elusive despite the inclusion of hundreds of data sets and years of cumulative research activity. Systematic reviews are an important part of the conservation decision making tool kit, although we believe the benefits of systematic reviews could be significantly enhanced by increasing the number of reviews focused on questions of direct relevance to on-the-ground managers; defining a more focused geographic and taxonomic breadth that better reflects available data; including a broader range of evidence types; and appraising the cost-effectiveness of interventions. © 2013 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley

Systematic reviews of health economic evaluations: a protocol for a systematic review of characteristics and methods applied.

PubMed

Luhnen, Miriam; Prediger, Barbara; Neugebauer, Edmund A M; Mathes, Tim

2017-12-02

The number of systematic reviews of economic evaluations is steadily increasing. This is probably related to the continuing pressure on health budgets worldwide which makes an efficient resource allocation increasingly crucial. In particular in recent years, the introduction of several high-cost interventions presents enormous challenges regarding universal accessibility and sustainability of health care systems. An increasing number of health authorities, inter alia, feel the need for analyzing economic evidence. Economic evidence might effectively be generated by means of systematic reviews. Nevertheless, no standard methods seem to exist for their preparation so far. The objective of this study was to analyze the methods applied for systematic reviews of health economic evaluations (SR-HE) with a focus on the identification of common challenges. The planned study is a systematic review of the characteristics and methods actually applied in SR-HE. We will combine validated search filters developed for the retrieval of economic evaluations and systematic reviews to identify relevant studies in MEDLINE (via Ovid, 2015-present). To be eligible for inclusion, studies have to conduct a systematic review of full economic evaluations. Articles focusing exclusively on methodological aspects and secondary publications of health technology assessment (HTA) reports will be excluded. Two reviewers will independently assess titles and abstracts and then full-texts of studies for eligibility. Methodological features will be extracted in a standardized, beforehand piloted data extraction form. Data will be summarized with descriptive statistical measures and systematically analyzed focusing on differences/similarities and methodological weaknesses. The systematic review will provide a detailed overview of characteristics of SR-HE and the applied methods. Differences and methodological shortcomings will be detected and their implications will be discussed. The findings of our

Evaluating the effectiveness of five screening tools used to identify malnutrition risk in hospitalized elderly: A systematic review.

PubMed

Cascio, Brooke L; Logomarsino, John V

This systematic review investigated 5 frequently used nutrition screening tools (NSTs) used in hospitals and their effectiveness at identifying malnutrition risk in the elderly. A literature review was conducted to obtain research articles focused on malnutrition screening in hospitalized elderly and effectiveness of the NST used. Twenty six articles were reviewed and evaluated, resulting in 8 that met inclusion criteria. The Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form, designed for use in the elderly, resulted in overestimation of malnutrition. Four screening tools did demonstrate more effectiveness in identifying malnutrition risk; however, several different biochemical and anthropometric parameters were used, which prevented meaningful comparisons. There is a need for a universal NST "gold standard" for use in the elderly, and further research is indicated. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Systematic review automation technologies

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Systematic reviews, a cornerstone of evidence-based medicine, are not produced quickly enough to support clinical practice. The cost of production, availability of the requisite expertise and timeliness are often quoted as major contributors for the delay. This detailed survey of the state of the art of information systems designed to support or automate individual tasks in the systematic review, and in particular systematic reviews of randomized controlled clinical trials, reveals trends that see the convergence of several parallel research projects. We surveyed literature describing informatics systems that support or automate the processes of systematic review or each of the tasks of the systematic review. Several projects focus on automating, simplifying and/or streamlining specific tasks of the systematic review. Some tasks are already fully automated while others are still largely manual. In this review, we describe each task and the effect that its automation would have on the entire systematic review process, summarize the existing information system support for each task, and highlight where further research is needed for realizing automation for the task. Integration of the systems that automate systematic review tasks may lead to a revised systematic review workflow. We envisage the optimized workflow will lead to system in which each systematic review is described as a computer program that automatically retrieves relevant trials, appraises them, extracts and synthesizes data, evaluates the risk of bias, performs meta-analysis calculations, and produces a report in real time. PMID:25005128

Search and selection methodology of systematic reviews in orthodontics (2000-2004).

PubMed

Flores-Mir, Carlos; Major, Michael P; Major, Paul W

2006-08-01

More systematic reviews related to orthodontic topics are published each year, although little has been done to evaluate their search and selection methodologies. Systematic reviews related to orthodontics published between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2004, were searched for their use of multiple electronic databases and secondary searches. The search and selection methods of identified systematic reviews were evaluated against the Cochrane Handbook's guidelines. Sixteen orthodontic systematic reviews were identified in this period. The percentage of reviews documenting and using each criterion of article searching has changed over the last 5 years, with no recognizable directional trend. On average, most systematic reviews documented their electronic search terms (88%) and inclusion-exclusion criteria (100%), and used secondary searching (75%). Many still failed to search more than MEDLINE (56%), failed to document the database names and search dates (37%), failed to document the search strategy (62%), did not use several reviewers for selecting studies (75%), and did not include all languages (81%). The methodology of systematic reviews in orthodontics is still limited, with key methodological components frequently absent or not appropriately described.

Interventions for Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Are Practice Guidelines Based on Systematic Reviews?

PubMed Central

Lindsley, Kristina; Li, Tianjing; Ssemanda, Elizabeth; Virgili, Gianni; Dickersin, Kay

2016-01-01

Topic Are existing systematic reviews of interventions for age-related macular degeneration incorporated into clinical practice guidelines? Clinical relevance High-quality systematic reviews should be used to underpin evidence-based clinical practice guidelines and clinical care. We have examined the reliability of systematic reviews of interventions for age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and described the main findings of reliable reviews in relation to clinical practice guidelines. Methods Eligible publications are systematic reviews of the effectiveness of treatment interventions for AMD. We searched a database of systematic reviews in eyes and vision and employed no language or date restrictions; the database is up-to-date as of May 6, 2014. Two authors independently screened records for eligibility and abstracted and assessed the characteristics and methods of each review. We classified reviews as “reliable” when they reported eligibility criteria, comprehensive searches, appraisal of methodological quality of included studies, appropriate statistical methods for meta-analysis, and conclusions based on results. We mapped treatment recommendations from the American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Patterns (AAO PPP) for AMD to the identified systematic reviews and assessed whether any reliable systematic review was cited or could have been cited to support each treatment recommendation. Results Of 1,570 systematic reviews in our database, 47 met our inclusion criteria. Most of the systematic reviews targeted neovascular AMD and investigated anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) interventions, dietary supplements or photodynamic therapy. We classified over two-thirds (33/47) of the reports as reliable. The quality of reporting varied, with criteria for reliable reporting met more often for Cochrane reviews and for reviews whose authors disclosed conflicts of interest. Although most systematic reviews were reliable, anti

Evidence-based practice: extending the search to find material for the systematic review

PubMed Central

Helmer, Diane; Savoie, Isabelle; Green, Carolyn; Kazanjian, Arminée

2001-01-01

Background: Cochrane-style systematic reviews increasingly require the participation of librarians. Guidelines on the appropriate search strategy to use for systematic reviews have been proposed. However, research evidence supporting these recommendations is limited. Objective: This study investigates the effectiveness of various systematic search methods used to uncover randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for systematic reviews. Effectiveness is defined as the proportion of relevant material uncovered for the systematic review using extended systematic review search methods. The following extended systematic search methods are evaluated: searching subject-specific or specialized databases (including trial registries), hand searching, scanning reference lists, and communicating personally. Methods: Two systematic review projects were prospectively monitored regarding the method used to identify items as well as the type of items retrieved. The proportion of RCTs identified by each systematic search method was calculated. Results: The extended systematic search methods uncovered 29.2% of all items retrieved for the systematic reviews. The search of specialized databases was the most effective method, followed by scanning of reference lists, communicating personally, and hand searching. Although the number of items identified through hand searching was small, these unique items would otherwise have been missed. Conclusions: Extended systematic search methods are effective tools for uncovering material for the systematic review. The quality of the items uncovered has yet to be assessed and will be key in evaluating the value of the systematic search methods. PMID:11837256

Social network analysis identified central outcomes for core outcome sets using systematic reviews of HIV/AIDS.

PubMed

Saldanha, Ian J; Li, Tianjing; Yang, Cui; Ugarte-Gil, Cesar; Rutherford, George W; Dickersin, Kay

2016-02-01

Methods to develop core outcome sets, the minimum outcomes that should be measured in research in a topic area, vary. We applied social network analysis methods to understand outcome co-occurrence patterns in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/AIDS systematic reviews and identify outcomes central to the network of outcomes in HIV/AIDS. We examined all Cochrane reviews of HIV/AIDS as of June 2013. We defined a tie as two outcomes (nodes) co-occurring in ≥2 reviews. To identify central outcomes, we used normalized node betweenness centrality (nNBC) (the extent to which connections between other outcomes in a network rely on that outcome as an intermediary). We conducted a subgroup analysis by HIV/AIDS intervention type (i.e., clinical management, biomedical prevention, behavioral prevention, and health services). The 140 included reviews examined 1,140 outcomes, 294 of which were unique. The most central outcome overall was all-cause mortality (nNBC = 23.9). The most central and most frequent outcomes differed overall and within subgroups. For example, "adverse events (specified)" was among the most central but not among the most frequent outcomes, overall. Social network analysis methods are a novel application to identify central outcomes, which provides additional information potentially useful for developing core outcome sets. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

A bibliometric analysis of systematic reviews on vaccines and immunisation.

PubMed

Fernandes, Silke; Jit, Mark; Bozzani, Fiammetta; Griffiths, Ulla K; Scott, J Anthony G; Burchett, Helen E D

2018-04-19

SYSVAC is an online bibliographic database of systematic reviews and systematic review protocols on vaccines and immunisation compiled by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and hosted by the World Health Organization (WHO) through their National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAG) resource centre (www.nitag-resource.org). Here the development of the database and a bibliometric review of its content is presented, describing trends in the publication of policy-relevant systematic reviews on vaccines and immunisation from 2008 to 2016. Searches were conducted in seven scientific databases according to a standardized search protocol, initially in 2014 with the most recent update in January 2017. Abstracts and titles were screened according to specific inclusion criteria. All included publications were coded into relevant categories based on a standardized protocol and subsequently analysed to look at trends in time, topic, area of focus, population and geographic location. After screening for inclusion criteria, 1285 systematic reviews were included in the database. While in 2008 there were only 34 systematic reviews on a vaccine-related topic, this increased to 322 in 2016. The most frequent pathogens/diseases studied were influenza, human papillomavirus and pneumococcus. There were several areas of duplication and overlap. As more systematic reviews are published it becomes increasingly time-consuming for decision-makers to identify relevant information among the ever-increasing volume available. The risk of duplication also increases, particularly given the current lack of coordination of systematic reviews on vaccine-related questions, both in terms of their commissioning and their execution. The SYSVAC database offers an accessible catalogue of vaccine-relevant systematic reviews with, where possible access or a link to the full-text. SYSVAC provides a freely searchable platform to identify existing vaccine-policy-relevant systematic

A mixed-methods approach to systematic reviews.

PubMed

Pearson, Alan; White, Heath; Bath-Hextall, Fiona; Salmond, Susan; Apostolo, Joao; Kirkpatrick, Pamela

2015-09-01

There are an increasing number of published single-method systematic reviews that focus on different types of evidence related to a particular topic. As policy makers and practitioners seek clear directions for decision-making from systematic reviews, it is likely that it will be increasingly difficult for them to identify 'what to do' if they are required to find and understand a plethora of syntheses related to a particular topic.Mixed-methods systematic reviews are designed to address this issue and have the potential to produce systematic reviews of direct relevance to policy makers and practitioners.On the basis of the recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute International Mixed Methods Reviews Methodology Group in 2012, the Institute adopted a segregated approach to mixed-methods synthesis as described by Sandelowski et al., which consists of separate syntheses of each component method of the review. Joanna Briggs Institute's mixed-methods synthesis of the findings of the separate syntheses uses a Bayesian approach to translate the findings of the initial quantitative synthesis into qualitative themes and pooling these with the findings of the initial qualitative synthesis.

Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches.

PubMed

O'Mara-Eves, Alison; Thomas, James; McNaught, John; Miwa, Makoto; Ananiadou, Sophia

2015-01-14

The large and growing number of published studies, and their increasing rate of publication, makes the task of identifying relevant studies in an unbiased way for inclusion in systematic reviews both complex and time consuming. Text mining has been offered as a potential solution: through automating some of the screening process, reviewer time can be saved. The evidence base around the use of text mining for screening has not yet been pulled together systematically; this systematic review fills that research gap. Focusing mainly on non-technical issues, the review aims to increase awareness of the potential of these technologies and promote further collaborative research between the computer science and systematic review communities. Five research questions led our review: what is the state of the evidence base; how has workload reduction been evaluated; what are the purposes of semi-automation and how effective are they; how have key contextual problems of applying text mining to the systematic review field been addressed; and what challenges to implementation have emerged? We answered these questions using standard systematic review methods: systematic and exhaustive searching, quality-assured data extraction and a narrative synthesis to synthesise findings. The evidence base is active and diverse; there is almost no replication between studies or collaboration between research teams and, whilst it is difficult to establish any overall conclusions about best approaches, it is clear that efficiencies and reductions in workload are potentially achievable. On the whole, most suggested that a saving in workload of between 30% and 70% might be possible, though sometimes the saving in workload is accompanied by the loss of 5% of relevant studies (i.e. a 95% recall). Using text mining to prioritise the order in which items are screened should be considered safe and ready for use in 'live' reviews. The use of text mining as a 'second screener' may also be used cautiously

A protocol for identifying suitable biomarkers to assess fish health: A systematic review

PubMed Central

2017-01-01

Background Biomarkers have been used extensively to provide the connection between external levels of contaminant exposure, internal levels of tissue contamination, and early adverse effects in organisms. Objectives To present a three-step protocol for identifying suitable biomarkers to assess fish health in coastal and marine ecosystems, using Gladstone Harbour (Australia) as a case study. Methods Prior to applying our protocol, clear working definitions for biomarkers were developed to ensure consistency with the global literature on fish health assessment. First, contaminants of concern were identified based on the presence of point and diffuse sources of pollution and available monitoring data for the ecosystem of interest. Second, suitable fish species were identified using fisheries dependent and independent data, and prioritised based on potential pathways of exposure to the contaminants of concern. Finally, a systematic and critical literature review was conducted on the use of biomarkers to assess the health of fish exposed to the contaminants of concern. Results/Discussion We present clear working definitions for bioaccumulation markers, biomarkers of exposure, biomarkers of effect and biomarkers of susceptibility. Based on emission and concentration information, seven metals were identified as contaminants of concern for Gladstone Harbour. Twenty out of 232 fish species were abundant enough to be potentially suitable for biomarker studies; five of these were prioritised based on potential pathways of exposure and susceptibility to metals. The literature search on biomarkers yielded 5,035 articles, of which 151met the inclusion criteria. Based on our review, the most suitable biomarkers include bioaccumulation markers, biomarkers of exposure (CYP1A, EROD, SOD, LPOX, HSP, MT, DNA strand breaks, micronuclei, apoptosis), and biomarkers of effect (histopathology, TAG:ST). Conclusion Our protocol outlines a clear pathway to identify suitable biomarkers to

AHRQ series paper 3: identifying, selecting, and refining topics for comparative effectiveness systematic reviews: AHRQ and the effective health-care program.

PubMed

Whitlock, Evelyn P; Lopez, Sarah A; Chang, Stephanie; Helfand, Mark; Eder, Michelle; Floyd, Nicole

2010-05-01

This article discusses the identification, selection, and refinement of topics for comparative effectiveness systematic reviews within the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Effective Health Care (EHC) program. The EHC program seeks to align its research topic selection with the overall goals of the program, impartially and consistently apply predefined criteria to potential topics, involve stakeholders to identify high-priority topics, be transparent and accountable, and continually evaluate and improve processes. A topic prioritization group representing stakeholder and scientific perspectives evaluates topic nominations that fit within the EHC program (are "appropriate") to determine how "important" topics are as considered against seven criteria. The group then judges whether a new comparative effectiveness systematic review would be a duplication of existing research syntheses, and if not duplicative, if there is adequate type and volume of research to conduct a new systematic review. Finally, the group considers the "potential value and impact" of a comparative effectiveness systematic review. As the EHC program develops, ongoing challenges include ensuring the program addresses truly unmet needs for synthesized research because national and international efforts in this arena are uncoordinated, as well as engaging a range of stakeholders in program decisions while also achieving efficiency and timeliness.

Moving toward the automation of the systematic review process: a summary of discussions at the second meeting of International Collaboration for the Automation of Systematic Reviews (ICASR).

PubMed

O'Connor, Annette M; Tsafnat, Guy; Gilbert, Stephen B; Thayer, Kristina A; Wolfe, Mary S

2018-01-09

The second meeting of the International Collaboration for Automation of Systematic Reviews (ICASR) was held 3-4 October 2016 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. ICASR is an interdisciplinary group whose aim is to maximize the use of technology for conducting rapid, accurate, and efficient systematic reviews of scientific evidence. Having automated tools for systematic review should enable more transparent and timely review, maximizing the potential for identifying and translating research findings to practical application. The meeting brought together multiple stakeholder groups including users of summarized research, methodologists who explore production processes and systematic review quality, and technologists such as software developers, statisticians, and vendors. This diversity of participants was intended to ensure effective communication with numerous stakeholders about progress toward automation of systematic reviews and stimulate discussion about potential solutions to identified challenges. The meeting highlighted challenges, both simple and complex, and raised awareness among participants about ongoing efforts by various stakeholders. An outcome of this forum was to identify several short-term projects that participants felt would advance the automation of tasks in the systematic review workflow including (1) fostering better understanding about available tools, (2) developing validated datasets for testing new tools, (3) determining a standard method to facilitate interoperability of tools such as through an application programming interface or API, and (4) establishing criteria to evaluate the quality of tools' output. ICASR 2016 provided a beneficial forum to foster focused discussion about tool development and resources and reconfirm ICASR members' commitment toward systematic reviews' automation.

Methological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on acupuncture for stroke: A review of review.

PubMed

Chen, Xin-Lin; Mo, Chuan-Wei; Lu, Li-Ya; Gao, Ri-Yang; Xu, Qian; Wu, Min-Feng; Zhou, Qian-Yi; Hu, Yue; Zhou, Xuan; Li, Xian-Tao

2017-11-01

To assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses regarding acupuncture intervention for stroke and the primary studies within them. Two researchers searched PubMed, Cumulative index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, ISI Web of Knowledge, Cochrane, Allied and Complementary Medicine, Ovid Medline, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang and Traditional Chinese Medical Database to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses about acupuncture for stroke published from the inception to December 2016. Review characteristics and the criteria for assessing the primary studies within reviews were extracted. The methodological quality of the reviews was assessed using adapted Oxman and Guyatt Scale. The methodological quality of primary studies was also assessed. Thirty-two eligible reviews were identified, 15 in English and 17 in Chinese. The English reviews were scored higher than the Chinese reviews (P=0.025), especially in criteria for avoiding bias and the scope of search. All reviews used the quality criteria to evaluate the methodological quality of primary studies, but some criteria were not comprehensive. The primary studies, in particular the Chinese reviews, had problems with randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, dropouts and withdrawals, intent-to-treat analysis and adverse events. Important methodological flaws were found in Chinese systematic reviews and primary studies. It was necessary to improve the methodological quality and reporting quality of both the systematic reviews published in China and primary studies on acupuncture for stroke.

Methodological quality of systematic reviews on influenza vaccination.

PubMed

Remschmidt, Cornelius; Wichmann, Ole; Harder, Thomas

2014-03-26

There is a growing body of evidence on the risks and benefits of influenza vaccination in various target groups. Systematic reviews are of particular importance for policy decisions. However, their methodological quality can vary considerably. To investigate the methodological quality of systematic reviews on influenza vaccination (efficacy, effectiveness, safety) and to identify influencing factors. A systematic literature search on systematic reviews on influenza vaccination was performed, using MEDLINE, EMBASE and three additional databases (1990-2013). Review characteristics were extracted and the methodological quality of the reviews was evaluated using the assessment of multiple systematic reviews (AMSTAR) tool. U-test, Kruskal-Wallis test, chi-square test, and multivariable linear regression analysis were used to assess the influence of review characteristics on AMSTAR-score. Fourty-six systematic reviews fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Average methodological quality was high (median AMSTAR-score: 8), but variability was large (AMSTAR range: 0-11). Quality did not differ significantly according to vaccination target group. Cochrane reviews had higher methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews (p=0.001). Detailed analysis showed that this was due to better study selection and data extraction, inclusion of unpublished studies, and better reporting of study characteristics (all p<0.05). In the adjusted analysis, no other factor, including industry sponsorship or journal impact factor had an influence on AMSTAR score. Systematic reviews on influenza vaccination showed large differences regarding their methodological quality. Reviews conducted by the Cochrane collaboration were of higher quality than others. When using systematic reviews to guide the development of vaccination recommendations, the methodological quality of a review in addition to its content should be considered. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Comparing the effectiveness of using generic and specific search terms in electronic databases to identify health outcomes for a systematic review: a prospective comparative study of literature search methods

PubMed Central

MacLean, Alice; Sweeting, Helen; Hunt, Kate

2012-01-01

Objective To compare the effectiveness of systematic review literature searches that use either generic or specific terms for health outcomes. Design Prospective comparative study of two electronic literature search strategies. The ‘generic’ search included general terms for health such as ‘adolescent health’, ‘health status’, ‘morbidity’, etc. The ‘specific’ search focused on terms for a range of specific illnesses, such as ‘headache’, ‘epilepsy’, ‘diabetes mellitus’, etc. Data sources The authors searched Medline, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO and the Education Resources Information Center for studies published in English between 1992 and April 2010. Main outcome measures Number and proportion of studies included in the systematic review that were identified from each search. Results The two searches tended to identify different studies. Of 41 studies included in the final review, only three (7%) were identified by both search strategies, 21 (51%) were identified by the generic search only and 17 (41%) were identified by the specific search only. 5 of the 41 studies were also identified through manual searching methods. Studies identified by the two ELS differed in terms of reported health outcomes, while each ELS uniquely identified some of the review's higher quality studies. Conclusions Electronic literature searches (ELS) are a vital stage in conducting systematic reviews and therefore have an important role in attempts to inform and improve policy and practice with the best available evidence. While the use of both generic and specific health terms is conventional for many reviewers and information scientists, there are also reviews that rely solely on either generic or specific terms. Based on the findings, reliance on only the generic or specific approach could increase the risk of systematic reviews missing important evidence and, consequently, misinforming decision makers

Cochrane Systematic Reviews of Chinese Herbal Medicines: An Overview

PubMed Central

Hu, Jing; Zhang, Junhua; Zhao, Wei; Zhang, Yongling; Zhang, Li; Shang, Hongcai

2011-01-01

Objectives Our study had two objectives: a) to systematically identify all existing systematic reviews of Chinese herbal medicines (CHM) published in Cochrane Library; b) to assess the methodological quality of included reviews. Methodology/Principal Findings We performed a systematic search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR, Issue 5, 2010) to identify all reviews of CHM. A total of fifty-eight reviews were eligible for our study. Twenty-one of the included reviews had at least one Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) practitioner as its co-author. 7 reviews didn't include any primary study, the remaining reviews (n = 51) included a median of 9 studies and 936 participants. 50% of reviews were last assessed as up-to-date prior to 2008. The questions addressed by 39 reviews were broad in scope, in which 9 reviews combined studies with different herbal medicines. For OQAQ, the mean of overall quality score (item 10) was 5.05 (95% CI; 4.58-5.52). All reviews assessed the methodological quality of primary studies, 16% of included primary studies used adequate sequence generation and 7% used adequate allocation concealment. Of the 51 nonempty reviews, 23 reviews were reported as being inconclusive, while 27 concluded that there might be benefit of CHM, which was limited by the poor quality or inadequate quantity of included studies. 58 reviews reported searching a median of seven electronic databases, while 10 reviews did not search any Chinese database. Conclusions Now CDSR has included large numbers of CHM reviews, our study identified some areas which could be improved, such as almost half of included reviews did not have the participation of TCM practitioners and were not up-to-date according to Cochrane criteria, some reviews pooled the results of different herbal medicines and ignored the searching of Chinese databases. PMID:22174870

Making evidence more wanted: a systematic review of facilitators to enhance the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

PubMed

Wallace, John; Byrne, Charles; Clarke, Mike

2012-12-01

The increased uptake of evidence from systematic reviews is advocated because of their potential to improve the quality of decision making for patient care. Systematic reviews can do this by decreasing inappropriate clinical variation and quickly expediting the application of current, effective advances to everyday practice. However, research suggests that evidence from systematic reviews has not been widely adopted by health professionals. Little is known about the facilitators to uptake of research evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. To review the facilitators to the uptake by decision makers, of evidence from systematic, meta-analyses and the databases containing them. We searched 19 databases covering the full range of publication years, utilised three search engines and also personally contacted investigators. Grey literature and knowledge translation research was particularly sought. Reference lists of primary studies and related reviews were also searched. Studies were included if they reported on the views and perceptions of decision makers on the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews, meta-analyses and the databases associated with them. One investigator screened titles to identify candidate articles, and then two reviewers independently assessed the relevance of retrieved articles to exclude studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria. Quality of the included studies was also assessed. Using a pre-established taxonomy, two reviewers described the methods of included studies and extracted data that were summarised in tables and then analysed. Differences were resolved by consensus. Of articles initially identified, we selected unique published studies describing at least one facilitator to the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews. The 15 unique studies reported 10 surveys, three qualitative investigations and two mixed studies that addressed potential facilitators. Five studies were from Canada, four from the UK, three from

Systematic reviews of surgical procedures in children: quantity, coverage and quality.

PubMed

McGee, Richard G; Craig, Jonathan C; Rogerson, Thomas E; Webster, Angela C

2013-04-01

Systematic reviews have the potential to map those areas where children are under-represented in surgical research. We aimed to describe and evaluate the quantity, coverage and the quality of conduct and reporting of systematic reviews of surgical procedures in children. We searched four biomedical databases, a systematic review register, reference lists and conducted hand searching to identify relevant reviews. Two reviewers worked independently to critically appraise included studies and abstract data. We assessed reporting quality using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis statement and methodological quality using the Assessment of Multiple SysTemAtic Reviews tool. Fifteen systematic reviews were identified, representing 0.01% of all paediatric surgical citations in MEDLINE and Embase. Thirteen of the reviews were Cochrane reviews, and most reviews (12/15) addressed subspecialty interests such as otorhinolaryngology. The median number of included trials per systematic review was four (interquartile range 1 to 9.5), the median number of primary outcomes was 5.5 (interquartile range 3.5 to 7.5). In general, reporting and methodological quality was good although there were several omissions, particularly around completeness of reporting of statistical methods used, and utilisation of quality assessments in analyses. Outcomes were often not clearly defined and descriptions of procedures lacked sufficient detail to determine the similarities and differences among surgical procedures within the contributing trials. Systematic reviews of surgical procedures in children are rarely published. To improve the evidence base and guide research agendas, more systematic reviews should be conducted, using standard guidelines for conduct and reporting. © 2013 The Authors. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health © 2013 Paediatrics and Child Health Division (Royal Australasian College of Physicians).

Systematic review of interventions to improve prescribing.

PubMed

Ostini, Remo; Hegney, Desley; Jackson, Claire; Williamson, Margaret; Mackson, Judith M; Gurman, Karin; Hall, Wayne; Tett, Susan E

2009-03-01

To update 2 comprehensive reviews of systematic reviews on prescribing interventions and identify the latest evidence about the effectiveness of the interventions. Systematic searches for English-language reports of experimental and quasi-experimental research were conducted in PubMed (1951-May 2007), EMBASE (1974-March 2008), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-March 2008), and 11 other bibliographic databases of medical, social science, and business research. Following an initial title screening process and after selecting 6 specific intervention categories (identified from the previous reviews) in community settings, 2 reviewers independently assessed abstracts and then full studies for relevance and quality and extracted relevant data using formal assessment and data extraction tools. Results were then methodically incorporated into the findings of the 2 earlier reviews of systematic reviews. DATA SELECTION AND SYNTHESIS: Twenty-nine of 26,314 articles reviewed were assessed to be of relevant, high-quality research. Audit and feedback, together with educational outreach visits, were the focus of the majority of recent, high-quality research into prescribing interventions. These interventions were also the most effective in improving prescribing practice. A smaller number of studies included a patient-mediated intervention; this intervention was not consistently effective. There is insufficient recent research into manual reminders to confidently update earlier reviews and there remains insufficient evidence to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of local consensus processes or multidisciplinary teams. Educational outreach as well as audit and feedback continue to dominate research into prescribing interventions. These 2 prescribing interventions also most consistently show positive results. Much less research is conducted into other types of interventions and there is still very little effort to systematically test why interventions do or do

A systematic scoping review of the evidence for consumer involvement in organisations undertaking systematic reviews: focus on Cochrane.

PubMed

Morley, Richard F; Norman, Gill; Golder, Su; Griffith, Polly

2016-01-01

Cochrane is the largest international producer of systematic reviews of clinical trial evidence. We looked for published evidence that reports where consumers (patients and the public) have been involved in Cochrane systematic reviews, and also in reviews published by other organisations.We found 36 studies that reported about consumer involvement either in individual systematic reviews, or in other organisations. The studies showed that consumers were involved in reviews in a range of different ways: coordinating and producing reviews, making reviews more accessible, and spreading the results of reviews ("knowledge transfer"). The most common role was commenting on reviews ("peer reviewing"). Consumers also had other general roles, for example in educating people about evidence or helping other consumers. There were some interesting examples of new ways of involving consumers. The studies showed that most consumers came from rich and English speaking countries. There was little evidence about how consumer involvement had changed the reviews ("impact"). The studies found that consumer involvement needed to be properly supported.In future we believe that more research should be done to understand what kind of consumer involvement has the best impact; that more review authors should report how consumers have been involved; and that consumers who help with reviews should come from more varied backgrounds. Background Cochrane is the largest international producer of systematic reviews, and is committed to consumer involvement in the production and dissemination of its reviews. The review aims to systematically scope the evidence base for consumer involvement in organisations which commission, undertake or support systematic reviews; with an emphasis on Cochrane. Methods In June 2015 we searched six databases and other sources for studies of consumer involvement in organisations which commission, undertake or support systematic reviews, or in individual systematic

Manual search approaches used by systematic reviewers in dermatology.

PubMed

Vassar, Matt; Atakpo, Paul; Kash, Melissa J

2016-10-01

Manual searches are supplemental approaches to database searches to identify additional primary studies for systematic reviews. The authors argue that these manual approaches, in particular hand-searching and perusing reference lists, are often considered the same yet lead to different outcomes. We conducted a PubMed search for systematic reviews in the top 10 dermatology journals (January 2006-January 2016). After screening, the final sample comprised 292 reviews. Statements related to manual searches were extracted from each review and categorized by the primary and secondary authors. Each statement was categorized as either "Search of Reference List," "Hand Search," "Both," or "Unclear." Of the 292 systematic reviews included in our sample, 143 reviews (48.97%) did not report a hand-search or scan of reference lists. One-hundred thirty-six reviews (46.58%) reported searches of reference lists, while 4 reviews (1.37%) reported systematic hand-searches. Three reviews (1.03%) reported use of both hand-searches and scanning reference lists. Six reviews (2.05%) were classified as unclear due to vague wording. Authors of systematic reviews published in dermatology journals in our study sample scanned reference lists more frequently than they conducted hand-searches, possibly contributing to biased search outcomes. We encourage systematic reviewers to routinely practice hand-searching in order to minimize bias.

An assessment of the compliance of systematic review articles published in craniofacial surgery with the PRISMA statement guidelines: A systematic review.

PubMed

Pidgeon, Thomas Edward; Wellstead, Georgina; Sagoo, Harkiran; Jafree, Daniyal J; Fowler, Alexander J; Agha, Riaz A

2016-10-01

Systematic review evidence is increasing within craniofacial surgery. Compliance with recognised reporting guidelines for systematic review evidence has not been assessed. To assess the compliance of systematic reviews published in craniofacial journals with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting criteria. Thomson Reuters impact factor was used to identify three top craniofacial journals. A search for all systematic review articles published in these journals from 1st May 2010 to 30th April 2015 was conducted using MEDLINE PubMed. Two independent researchers assessed each study for inclusion and performed the data extraction. Data included the article reference information; the pathology and interventions examined and compliance of each review article with the PRISMA checklist. 97 studies were returned by the search. 62 studies proceeded to data extraction. The mean percentage of applicable PRISMA items that were met across all studies was 72.5% (range 28.6-96.2%). The area of poorest compliance was with the declaration of a study protocol (19.4% of studies). Only 37.1% of studies declared their source of funding. Compliance of systematic review articles within craniofacial surgery with areas of the PRISMA checklist could be improved. Copyright © 2016 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Automatable algorithms to identify nonmedical opioid use using electronic data: a systematic review.

PubMed

Canan, Chelsea; Polinski, Jennifer M; Alexander, G Caleb; Kowal, Mary K; Brennan, Troyen A; Shrank, William H

2017-11-01

Improved methods to identify nonmedical opioid use can help direct health care resources to individuals who need them. Automated algorithms that use large databases of electronic health care claims or records for surveillance are a potential means to achieve this goal. In this systematic review, we reviewed the utility, attempts at validation, and application of such algorithms to detect nonmedical opioid use. We searched PubMed and Embase for articles describing automatable algorithms that used electronic health care claims or records to identify patients or prescribers with likely nonmedical opioid use. We assessed algorithm development, validation, and performance characteristics and the settings where they were applied. Study variability precluded a meta-analysis. Of 15 included algorithms, 10 targeted patients, 2 targeted providers, 2 targeted both, and 1 identified medications with high abuse potential. Most patient-focused algorithms (67%) used prescription drug claims and/or medical claims, with diagnosis codes of substance abuse and/or dependence as the reference standard. Eleven algorithms were developed via regression modeling. Four used natural language processing, data mining, audit analysis, or factor analysis. Automated algorithms can facilitate population-level surveillance. However, there is no true gold standard for determining nonmedical opioid use. Users must recognize the implications of identifying false positives and, conversely, false negatives. Few algorithms have been applied in real-world settings. Automated algorithms may facilitate identification of patients and/or providers most likely to need more intensive screening and/or intervention for nonmedical opioid use. Additional implementation research in real-world settings would clarify their utility. © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com

"Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews in radiation oncology: A systematic review".

PubMed

Hasan, Haroon; Muhammed, Taaha; Yu, Jennifer; Taguchi, Kelsi; Samargandi, Osama A; Howard, A Fuchsia; Lo, Andrea C; Olson, Robert; Goddard, Karen

2017-10-01

The objective of our study was to evaluate the methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in Radiation Oncology. A systematic literature search was conducted for all eligible systematic reviews and meta-analyses in Radiation Oncology from 1966 to 2015. Methodological characteristics were abstracted from all works that satisfied the inclusion criteria and quality was assessed using the critical appraisal tool, AMSTAR. Regression analyses were performed to determine factors associated with a higher score of quality. Following exclusion based on a priori criteria, 410 studies (157 systematic reviews and 253 meta-analyses) satisfied the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses were found to be of fair to good quality while systematic reviews were found to be of less than fair quality. Factors associated with higher scores of quality in the multivariable analysis were including primary studies consisting of randomized control trials, performing a meta-analysis, and applying a recommended guideline related to establishing a systematic review protocol and/or reporting. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses may introduce a high risk of bias if applied to inform decision-making based on AMSTAR. We recommend that decision-makers in Radiation Oncology scrutinize the methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses prior to assessing their utility to inform evidence-based medicine and researchers adhere to methodological standards outlined in validated guidelines when embarking on a systematic review. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Interventions for Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Are Practice Guidelines Based on Systematic Reviews?

PubMed

Lindsley, Kristina; Li, Tianjing; Ssemanda, Elizabeth; Virgili, Gianni; Dickersin, Kay

2016-04-01

Are existing systematic reviews of interventions for age-related macular degeneration incorporated into clinical practice guidelines? High-quality systematic reviews should be used to underpin evidence-based clinical practice guidelines and clinical care. We examined the reliability of systematic reviews of interventions for age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and described the main findings of reliable reviews in relation to clinical practice guidelines. Eligible publications were systematic reviews of the effectiveness of treatment interventions for AMD. We searched a database of systematic reviews in eyes and vision without language or date restrictions; the database was up to date as of May 6, 2014. Two authors independently screened records for eligibility and abstracted and assessed the characteristics and methods of each review. We classified reviews as reliable when they reported eligibility criteria, comprehensive searches, methodologic quality of included studies, appropriate statistical methods for meta-analysis, and conclusions based on results. We mapped treatment recommendations from the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) Preferred Practice Patterns (PPPs) for AMD to systematic reviews and citations of reliable systematic reviews to support each treatment recommendation. Of 1570 systematic reviews in our database, 47 met inclusion criteria; most targeted neovascular AMD and investigated anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) interventions, dietary supplements, or photodynamic therapy. We classified 33 (70%) reviews as reliable. The quality of reporting varied, with criteria for reliable reporting met more often by Cochrane reviews and reviews whose authors disclosed conflicts of interest. Anti-VEGF agents and photodynamic therapy were the only interventions identified as effective by reliable reviews. Of 35 treatment recommendations extracted from the PPPs, 15 could have been supported with reliable systematic reviews; however, only 1

Methodology Series Module 6: Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis

PubMed Central

Setia, Maninder Singh

2016-01-01

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis have become an important of biomedical literature, and they provide the “highest level of evidence” for various clinical questions. There are a lot of studies – sometimes with contradictory conclusions – on a particular topic in literature. Hence, as a clinician, which results will you believe? What will you tell your patient? Which drug is better? A systematic review or a meta-analysis may help us answer these questions. In addition, it may also help us understand the quality of the articles in literature or the type of studies that have been conducted and published (example, randomized trials or observational studies). The first step it to identify a research question for systematic review or meta-analysis. The next step is to identify the articles that will be included in the study. This will be done by searching various databases; it is important that the researcher should search for articles in more than one database. It will also be useful to form a group of researchers and statisticians that have expertise in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analysis before initiating them. We strongly encourage the readers to register their proposed review/meta-analysis with PROSPERO. Finally, these studies should be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis checklist. PMID:27904176

Methodology Series Module 6: Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis.

PubMed

Setia, Maninder Singh

2016-01-01

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis have become an important of biomedical literature, and they provide the "highest level of evidence" for various clinical questions. There are a lot of studies - sometimes with contradictory conclusions - on a particular topic in literature. Hence, as a clinician, which results will you believe? What will you tell your patient? Which drug is better? A systematic review or a meta-analysis may help us answer these questions. In addition, it may also help us understand the quality of the articles in literature or the type of studies that have been conducted and published (example, randomized trials or observational studies). The first step it to identify a research question for systematic review or meta-analysis. The next step is to identify the articles that will be included in the study. This will be done by searching various databases; it is important that the researcher should search for articles in more than one database. It will also be useful to form a group of researchers and statisticians that have expertise in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analysis before initiating them. We strongly encourage the readers to register their proposed review/meta-analysis with PROSPERO. Finally, these studies should be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis checklist.

Information sources for obesity prevention policy research: a review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Hanneke, Rosie; Young, Sabrina K

2017-08-08

Systematic identification of evidence in health policy can be time-consuming and challenging. This study examines three questions pertaining to systematic reviews on obesity prevention policy, in order to identify the most efficient search methods: (1) What percentage of the primary studies selected for inclusion in the reviews originated in scholarly as opposed to gray literature? (2) How much of the primary scholarly literature in this topic area is indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE? (3) Which databases index the greatest number of primary studies not indexed in PubMed, and are these databases searched consistently across systematic reviews? We identified systematic reviews on obesity prevention policy and explored their search methods and citations. We determined the percentage of scholarly vs. gray literature cited, the most frequently cited journals, and whether each primary study was indexed in PubMed. We searched 21 databases for all primary study articles not indexed in PubMed to determine which database(s) indexed the highest number of these relevant articles. In total, 21 systematic reviews were identified. Ten of the 21 systematic reviews reported searching gray literature, and 12 reviews ultimately included gray literature in their analyses. Scholarly articles accounted for 577 of the 649 total primary study papers. Of these, 495 (76%) were indexed in PubMed. Google Scholar retrieved the highest number of the remaining 82 non-PubMed scholarly articles, followed by Scopus and EconLit. The Journal of the American Dietetic Association was the most-cited journal. Researchers can maximize search efficiency by searching a small yet targeted selection of both scholarly and gray literature resources. A highly sensitive search of PubMed and those databases that index the greatest number of relevant articles not indexed in PubMed, namely multidisciplinary and economics databases, could save considerable time and effort. When combined with a gray literature search and

Overview of systematic reviews in allergy epidemiology.

PubMed

Genuneit, J; Seibold, A M; Apfelbacher, C J; Konstantinou, G N; Koplin, J J; La Grutta, S; Logan, K; Perkin, M R; Flohr, C

2017-06-01

There is a substantial body of evidence on the epidemiology of allergic conditions, which has advanced the understanding of these conditions. We aimed to systematically identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the epidemiology of allergic diseases to assess what has been studied comprehensively and what areas might benefit from further research. We searched PubMed and EMBASE up to 12/2014 for systematic reviews on epidemiological research on allergic diseases. We indexed diseases and topics covered and extracted data on the search characteristics of each systematic review. The search resulted in 3991 entries after removing duplicates, plus 20 other items found via references and conference abstracts; 421 systematic reviews were relevant and included in this overview. The majority contained some evidence on asthma (72.9%). Allergic rhinitis, atopic eczema and food hypersensitivity were covered in 15.7%, 24.5% and 9.0%, respectively. Commonly studied risk factors for atopic eczema included dietary and microbial factors, while for asthma, pollution and genetic factors were often investigated in systematic reviews. There was some indication of differing search characteristics across topics. We present a comprehensive overview with an indexed database of published systematic reviews in allergy epidemiology. We believe that this clarifies where most research interest has focussed and which areas could benefit from further research. We propose that this effort is updated every few years to include the most recently published evidence and to extend the search to an even broader list of hypersensitivity/allergic disorders. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Application of systematic review methodology to the field of nutrition.

PubMed

Lichtenstein, Alice H; Yetley, Elizabeth A; Lau, Joseph

2008-12-01

Systematic reviews represent a rigorous and transparent approach to synthesizing scientific evidence that minimizes bias. They evolved within the medical community to support development of clinical and public health practice guidelines, set research agendas, and formulate scientific consensus statements. The use of systematic reviews for nutrition-related topics is more recent. Systematic reviews provide independently conducted comprehensive and objective assessments of available information addressing precise questions. This approach to summarizing available data is a useful tool for identifying the state of science including knowledge gaps and associated research needs, supporting development of science-based recommendations and guidelines, and serving as the foundation for updates as new data emerge. Our objective is to describe the steps for performing systematic reviews and highlight areas unique to the discipline of nutrition that are important to consider in data assessment. The steps involved in generating systematic reviews include identifying staffing and planning for outside expert input, forming a research team, developing an analytic framework, developing and refining research questions, defining eligibility criteria, identifying search terms, screening abstracts according to eligibility criteria, retrieving articles for evaluation, constructing evidence and summary tables, assessing methodological quality and applicability, and synthesizing results including performing meta-analysis, if appropriate. Unique and at times challenging, nutrition-related considerations include baseline nutrient exposure, nutrient status, bioequivalence of bioactive compounds, bioavailability, multiple and interrelated biological functions, undefined nature of some interventions, and uncertainties in intake assessment. Systematic reviews are a valuable and independent component of decision-making processes by groups responsible for developing science-based recommendations

What is the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of conservative interventions for tendinopathy? An overview of systematic reviews of clinical effectiveness and systematic review of economic evaluations.

PubMed

Long, Linda; Briscoe, Simon; Cooper, Chris; Hyde, Chris; Crathorne, Louise

2015-01-01

Lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) is a common complaint causing characteristic pain in the lateral elbow and upper forearm, and tenderness of the forearm extensor muscles. It is thought to be an overuse injury and can have a major impact on the patient's social and professional life. The condition is challenging to treat and prone to recurrent episodes. The average duration of a typical episode ranges from 6 to 24 months, with most (89%) reporting recovery by 1 year. This systematic review aims to summarise the evidence concerning the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of conservative interventions for LET. A comprehensive search was conducted from database inception to 2012 in a range of databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews to summarise the current evidence concerning the clinical effectiveness and a systematic review for the cost-effectiveness of conservative interventions for LET. We identified additional randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that could contribute further evidence to existing systematic reviews. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library and other important databases from inception to January 2013. A total of 29 systematic reviews published since 2003 matched our inclusion criteria. These were quality appraised using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist; five were considered high quality and evaluated using a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A total of 36 RCTs were identified that were not included in a systematic review and 29 RCTs were identified that had only been evaluated in an included systematic review of intermediate/low quality. These were then mapped to existing systematic reviews where further evidence could provide updates. Two economic evaluations were identified

The Need for Systematic Reviews of Reasons

PubMed Central

Sofaer, Neema; Strech, Daniel

2012-01-01

There are many ethical decisions in the practice of health research and care, and in the creation of policy and guidelines. We argue that those charged with making such decisions need a new genre of review. The new genre is an application of the systematic review, which was developed over decades to inform medical decision-makers about what the totality of studies that investigate links between smoking and cancer, for example, implies about whether smoking causes cancer. We argue that there is a need for similarly inclusive and rigorous reviews of reason-based bioethics, which uses reasoning to address ethical questions. After presenting a brief history of the systematic review, we reject the only existing model for writing a systematic review of reason-based bioethics, which holds that such a review should address an ethical question. We argue that such a systematic review may mislead decision-makers when a literature is incomplete, or when there are mutually incompatible but individually reasonable answers to the ethical question. Furthermore, such a review can be written without identifying all the reasons given when the ethical questions are discussed, their alleged implications for the ethical question, and the attitudes taken to the reasons. The reviews we propose address instead the empirical question of which reasons have been given when addressing a specified ethical question, and present such detailed information on the reasons. We argue that this information is likely to improve decision-making, both directly and indirectly, and also the academic literature. We explain the limitations of our alternative model for systematic reviews. PMID:21521251

Inflammatory Markers and Preeclampsia: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Black, Kathleen Darrah; Horowitz, June Andrews

Preeclampsia (PE), a serious and variable pregnancy complication affecting 5%-10% of the obstetric population, has an undetermined etiology, yet inflammation is concomitant with its development, particularly in relation to endothelial dysfunction. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the published evidence concerning an association between PE and inflammatory markers for their usefulness in the prediction or early identification of women with PE in antepartum clinical settings. In this systematic review, we used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health and MEDLINE/OVID were the electronic databases used for identifying published articles. We placed no time limit on the publication year. The search generated 798 articles. After removing duplicates, screening abstracts, and conducting full-text reviews, we retained 73 articles and examined 57 unique markers. This review shows that C-reactive protein and the cytokines, specifically the proinflammatory markers IL-6, IL-8, and tumor necrosis factor alpha, garner the most support as potential inflammatory markers for clinical surveillance of PE, particularly during the second and third trimesters. Based on this review, we cannot recommend any single inflammatory marker for routine clinical use to predict/identify PE onset or progression. Research is recommended to examine a combination panel of these four inflammatory markers both with and without clinical risk factors toward the goal of translation to practice.

Medication Regimen Complexity Measured by MRCI: A Systematic Review to Identify Health Outcomes.

PubMed

Alves-Conceição, Vanessa; Rocha, Kérilin Stancine Santos; Silva, Fernanda Vilanova Nascimento; Silva, Rafaella Oliveira Santos; Silva, Daniel Tenório da; Lyra-Jr, Divaldo Pereira de

2018-05-01

To perform a systematic review to identify health outcomes related to medication regimen complexity as measured by the Medication Regimen Complexity Index (MRCI) instrument. Cochrane Library, LILACS, PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Open Thesis, and Web of Science were searched from January 1, 2004, until April 02, 2018, using the following search terms: outcome assessment, drug therapy, and Medication Regimen Complexity Index and their synonyms in different combinations. Studies that used the MRCI instrument to measure medication regimen complexity and related it to clinical, humanistic, and/or economic outcomes were evaluated. Two reviewers independently carried out the analysis of the titles, abstracts, and complete texts according to the eligibility criteria, performed data extraction, and evaluated study quality. A total of 23 studies met the inclusion criteria; 18 health outcomes related to medication regimen complexity were found. The health outcomes most influenced by medication regimen complexity were hospital readmission, medication adherence, hospitalization, adverse drug events, and emergency sector visit. Only one study related medication regimen complexity with humanistic outcomes, and no study related medication regimen complexity to economic outcomes. Most of the studies were of good methodological quality. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: Health care professionals should pay attention to medication regimen complexity of the patients because this may influence health outcomes. This study identified some health outcomes that may be influenced by medication regimen complexity: hospitalization, hospital readmission, and medication adherence were more prevalent, showing a significant association between MRCI increase and these health outcomes.

Do adult mental health services identify child abuse and neglect? A systematic review.

PubMed

Read, John; Harper, David; Tucker, Ian; Kennedy, Angela

2018-02-01

Child abuse and neglect play a causal role in many mental health problems. Knowing whether users of mental health services were abused or neglected as children could be considered essential for developing comprehensive formulations and effective treatment plans. In the present study we report the findings of a systematic review, using independent searches of three databases designed to discover how often mental health staff find out whether their clients were abused or neglected as children. Twenty-one relevant studies were identified. Most people who use mental health services are never asked about child abuse or neglect. The majority of cases of child abuse or neglect are not identified by mental health services. Only 28% of abuse or neglect cases identified by researchers are found in the clients' files: emotional abuse, 44%; physical abuse, 33%; sexual abuse, 30%; emotional neglect, 17%; and physical neglect, 10%. Between 0% and 22% of mental health service users report being asked about child abuse. Men and people diagnosed with psychotic disorders are asked less than other people. Male staff ask less often than female staff. Some improvement over time was found. Policies compelling routine enquiry, training, and trauma-informed services are required. © 2017 Australian College of Mental Health Nurses Inc.

Methodological quality of systematic reviews in subfertility: a comparison of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in assisted reproductive technologies.

PubMed

Windsor, B; Popovich, I; Jordan, V; Showell, M; Shea, B; Farquhar, C

2012-12-01

Are there differences in the methodological quality of Cochrane systematic reviews (CRs) and non-Cochrane systematic reviews (NCRs) of assisted reproductive technologies? CRs on assisted reproduction are of higher methodological quality than similar reviews published in other journals. The quality of systematic reviews varies. This was a cross-sectional study of 30 CR and 30 NCR systematic reviews that were randomly selected from the eligible reviews identified from a literature search for the years 2007-2011. We extracted data on the reporting and methodological characteristics of the included systematic reviews. We assessed the methodological quality of the reviews using the 11-domain Measurement Tool to Assess the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool and subsequently compared CR and NCR systematic reviews. The AMSTAR quality assessment found that CRs were superior to NCRs. For 10 of 11 AMSTAR domains, the requirements were met in >50% of CRs, but only 4 of 11 domains showed requirements being met in >50% of NCRs. The strengths of CRs are the a priori study design, comprehensive literature search, explicit lists of included and excluded studies and assessments of internal validity. Significant failings in the CRs were found in duplicate study selection and data extraction (67% meeting requirements), assessment for publication bias (53% meeting requirements) and reporting of conflicts of interest (47% meeting requirements). NCRs were more likely to contain methodological weaknesses as the majority of the domains showed <40% of reviews meeting requirements, e.g. a priori study design (17%), duplicate study selection and data extraction (17%), assessment of study quality (27%), study quality in the formulation of conclusions (23%) and reporting of conflict of interests (10%). The AMSTAR assessment can only judge what is reported by authors. Although two of the five authors are involved in the production of CRs, the risk of bias was reduced by

Living systematic reviews: 2. Combining human and machine effort.

PubMed

Thomas, James; Noel-Storr, Anna; Marshall, Iain; Wallace, Byron; McDonald, Steven; Mavergames, Chris; Glasziou, Paul; Shemilt, Ian; Synnot, Anneliese; Turner, Tari; Elliott, Julian

2017-11-01

New approaches to evidence synthesis, which use human effort and machine automation in mutually reinforcing ways, can enhance the feasibility and sustainability of living systematic reviews. Human effort is a scarce and valuable resource, required when automation is impossible or undesirable, and includes contributions from online communities ("crowds") as well as more conventional contributions from review authors and information specialists. Automation can assist with some systematic review tasks, including searching, eligibility assessment, identification and retrieval of full-text reports, extraction of data, and risk of bias assessment. Workflows can be developed in which human effort and machine automation can each enable the other to operate in more effective and efficient ways, offering substantial enhancement to the productivity of systematic reviews. This paper describes and discusses the potential-and limitations-of new ways of undertaking specific tasks in living systematic reviews, identifying areas where these human/machine "technologies" are already in use, and where further research and development is needed. While the context is living systematic reviews, many of these enabling technologies apply equally to standard approaches to systematic reviewing. Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Appraisal of systematic reviews on the management of peri-implant diseases with two methodological tools.

PubMed

Faggion, Clovis Mariano; Monje, Alberto; Wasiak, Jason

2018-06-01

This study aimed to evaluate and compare the performance of two methodological instruments to appraise systematic reviews and to identify potential disagreements of systematic review authors regarding risk of bias (RoB) evaluation of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in systematic reviews on peri-implant diseases. We searched Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed Central, and Google Scholar for systematic reviews on peri-implant diseases published before July 11, 2017. Two authors independently evaluated the RoB and methodological quality of the systematic reviews by applying the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool and Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist, respectively. We assessed the RoB scores of the same RCTs published in different systematic reviews. Of the 32 systematic reviews identified, 23 reviews addressed the clinical topic of peri-implantitis. A high RoB was detected for most systematic reviews (n=25) using ROBIS, whilst five systematic reviews displayed low methodological quality by AMSTAR. Almost 30% of the RoB comparisons (for the same RCTs) had different RoB ratings across systematic reviews. The ROBIS tool appears to provide more conservative results than AMSTAR checklist. Considerable disagreement was found among systematic review authors rating the same RCT included in different systematic reviews. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Grey literature: An important resource in systematic reviews.

PubMed

Paez, Arsenio

2017-12-21

Systematic reviews aid the analysis and dissemination of evidence, using rigorous and transparent methods to generate empirically attained answers to focused research questions. Identifying all evidence relevant to the research questions is an essential component, and challenge, of systematic reviews. Grey literature, or evidence not published in commercial publications, can make important contributions to a systematic review. Grey literature can include academic papers, including theses and dissertations, research and committee reports, government reports, conference papers, and ongoing research, among others. It may provide data not found within commercially published literature, providing an important forum for disseminating studies with null or negative results that might not otherwise be disseminated. Grey literature may thusly reduce publication bias, increase reviews' comprehensiveness and timeliness and foster a balanced picture of available evidence. Grey literature's diverse formats and audiences can present a significant challenge in a systematic search for evidence. However, the benefits of including grey literature may far outweigh the cost in time and resource needed to search for it, and it is important for it to be included in a systematic review or review of evidence. A carefully thought out grey literature search strategy may be an invaluable component of a systematic review. This narrative review provides guidance about the benefits of including grey literature in a systematic review, and sources for searching through grey literature. An illustrative example of a search for evidence within grey literature sources is presented to highlight the potential contributions of such a search to a systematic review. Benefits and challenges of grey literature search methods are discussed, and recommendations made. © 2017 Chinese Cochrane Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

An overview of systematic review.

PubMed

Baker, Kathy A; Weeks, Susan Mace

2014-12-01

Systematic review is an invaluable tool for the practicing clinician. A well-designed systematic review represents the latest and most complete information available on a particular topic or intervention. This article highlights the key elements of systematic review, what it is and is not, and provides an overview of several reputable organizations supporting the methodological development and conduct of systematic review. Important aspects for evaluating the quality of a systematic review are also included. Copyright © 2014 American Society of PeriAnesthesia Nurses. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy

PubMed Central

Ernst, E

2002-01-01

Homeopathy remains one of the most controversial subjects in therapeutics. This article is an attempt to clarify its effectiveness based on recent systematic reviews. Electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews/meta-analysis on the subject. Seventeen articles fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Six of them related to re-analyses of one landmark meta-analysis. Collectively they implied that the overall positive result of this meta-analysis is not supported by a critical analysis of the data. Eleven independent systematic reviews were located. Collectively they failed to provide strong evidence in favour of homeopathy. In particular, there was no condition which responds convincingly better to homeopathic treatment than to placebo or other control interventions. Similarly, there was no homeopathic remedy that was demonstrated to yield clinical effects that are convincingly different from placebo. It is concluded that the best clinical evidence for homeopathy available to date does not warrant positive recommendations for its use in clinical practice. PMID:12492603

Systematic Reviews Published in Emergency Medicine Journals Do Not Routinely Search Clinical Trials Registries: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.

PubMed

Keil, Lukas G; Platts-Mills, Timothy F; Jones, Christopher W

2015-10-01

Publication bias compromises the validity of systematic reviews. This problem can be addressed in part through searching clinical trials registries to identify unpublished studies. This study aims to determine how often systematic reviews published in emergency medicine journals include clinical trials registry searches. We identified all systematic reviews published in the 6 highest-impact emergency medicine journals between January 1 and December 31, 2013. Systematic reviews that assessed the effects of an intervention were further examined to determine whether the authors described searching a clinical trials registry and whether this search identified relevant unpublished studies. Of 191 articles identified through PubMed search, 80 were confirmed to be systematic reviews. Our sample consisted of 41 systematic reviews that assessed a specific intervention. Eight of these 41 (20%) searched a clinical trials registry. For 4 of these 8 reviews, the registry search identified at least 1 relevant unpublished study. Systematic reviews published in emergency medicine journals do not routinely include searches of clinical trials registries. By helping authors identify unpublished trial data, the addition of registry searches may improve the validity of systematic reviews. Copyright © 2014 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Intervention quality is not routinely assessed in Cochrane systematic reviews of radiation therapy interventions.

PubMed

Abdul Rahim, Mohamad R; James, Melissa L; Hickey, Brigid E

2017-10-01

The aim of this study was to maximise the benefits from clinical trials involving technological interventions such as radiation therapy. High compliance to the quality assurance protocols is crucial. We assessed whether the quality of radiation therapy intervention was evaluated in Cochrane systematic reviews. We searched 416 published Cochrane systematic reviews and identified 67 Cochrane systematic reviews that investigated radiation therapy or radiotherapy as an intervention. For each systematic review, either quality assurance or quality control for the intervention was identified by a description of such processes in the published systematic reviews. Of the 67 Cochrane systematic reviews studied, only two mentioned quality assurance or quality control. Our findings revealed that 65 of 67 (97%) Cochrane systematic reviews of radiation therapy interventions failed to consider the quality of the intervention. We suggest that advice about the evaluation of intervention quality be added to author support materials. © 2017 The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists.

Cutaneous lichen planus: A systematic review of treatments.

PubMed

Fazel, Nasim

2015-06-01

Various treatment modalities are available for cutaneous lichen planus. Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Health Technology Assessment Database were searched for all the systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials related to cutaneous lichen planus. Two systematic reviews and nine relevant randomized controlled trials were identified. Acitretin, griseofulvin, hydroxychloroquine and narrow band ultraviolet B are demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of cutaneous lichen planus. Sulfasalazine is effective, but has an unfavorable safety profile. KH1060, a vitamin D analogue, is not beneficial in the management of cutaneous lichen planus. Evidence from large scale randomized trials demonstrating the safety and efficacy for many other treatment modalities used to treat cutaneous lichen planus is simply not available.

Assessing the Strengths of Mental Health Consumers: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bird, Victoria J.; Le Boutillier, Clair; Leamy, Mary; Larsen, John; Oades, Lindsay G.; Williams, Julie; Slade, Mike

2012-01-01

Strengths assessments focus on the individual's talents, abilities, resources, and strengths. No systematic review of strengths assessments for use within mental health populations has been published. The aims of this study were to describe and evaluate strengths assessments for use within mental health services. A systematic review identified 12…

Conducting systematic reviews of economic evaluations.

PubMed

Gomersall, Judith Streak; Jadotte, Yuri Tertilus; Xue, Yifan; Lockwood, Suzi; Riddle, Dru; Preda, Alin

2015-09-01

In 2012, a working group was established to review and enhance the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance for conducting systematic review of evidence from economic evaluations addressing a question(s) about health intervention cost-effectiveness. The objective is to present the outcomes of the working group. The group conducted three activities to inform the new guidance: review of literature on the utility/futility of systematic reviews of economic evaluations and consideration of its implications for updating the existing methodology; assessment of the critical appraisal tool in the existing guidance against criteria that promotes validity in economic evaluation research and two other commonly used tools; and a workshop. The debate in the literature on the limitations/value of systematic review of economic evidence cautions that systematic reviews of economic evaluation evidence are unlikely to generate one size fits all answers to questions about the cost-effectiveness of interventions and their comparators. Informed by this finding, the working group adjusted the framing of the objectives definition in the existing JBI methodology. The shift is away from defining the objective as to determine one cost-effectiveness measure toward summarizing study estimates of cost-effectiveness and informed by consideration of the included study characteristics (patient, setting, intervention component, etc.), identifying conditions conducive to lowering costs and maximizing health benefits. The existing critical appraisal tool was included in the new guidance. The new guidance includes the recommendation that a tool designed specifically for the purpose of appraising model-based studies be used together with the generic appraisal tool for economic evaluations assessment to evaluate model-based evaluations. The guidance produced by the group offers reviewers guidance for each step of the systematic review process, which are the same steps followed in JBI reviews of other

Onset factors in cerebral palsy: A systematic review.

PubMed

van Lieshout, Pascal; Candundo, Hamilton; Martino, Rosemary; Shin, Sabina; Barakat-Haddad, Caroline

2017-07-01

Studies have noted several factors associated with the occurrence of Cerebral Palsy (CP), yet considerable uncertainty remains about modifiable factors related to disease onset. A systematic review was performed to identify existing systematic reviews and primary studies pertaining to targeted factors associated with the onset of CP. The following databases were searched: MEDLINE, MEDLINE In Process, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINHAL, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, Huge Navigator, AARP Ageline. Variations of MeSH and keyword search terms were used. Critical appraisal was conducted on selected articles. Data extraction targeted reported factors, risk estimates, and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Findings identified two systematic reviews and three meta- analyses, as well as 83 studies of case control, cohort, and cross-sectional methodological designs. Selected studies indicated that lower gestational age was associated with the onset of CP. Medical diagnoses for the mother, in particular chorioamnionitis, was found to be positively associated with onset of CP. Preeclampsia was reported to be either inconclusive or positively associated with CP onset. Low birth weight predominantly indicated a positive association with the onset of CP, while male gender showed mixed findings. The combination of male gender with pre-term or low birth weight was also found to be positively associated with CP. Evidence was identified in the literature pertaining to specific factors relating to the onset of CP, in particular showing positive associations with lower gestational age and low birth weight. Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Side effects are incompletely reported among systematic reviews in gastroenterology.

PubMed

Mahady, Suzanne E; Schlub, Timothy; Bero, Lisa; Moher, David; Tovey, David; George, Jacob; Craig, Jonathan C

2015-02-01

Systematic reviews are an integral component of evidence-based health care. However, little is known on how well they report the potential harms of interventions. We assessed the reporting of harms in recently published systematic reviews of interventions relevant to clinical gastroenterology. We identified all systematic reviews of randomized trials of gastroenterology interventions published from 2008 to 2012 in highly cited gastroenterology and general medical journals. We adapted the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines for harms and assessed qualitative and quantitative parameters of harms reporting. Regression analyses determined predictors of more comprehensive harms reporting. In total, 78 systematic reviews were identified, with 72 published in gastroenterology journals and six in general medical journals. Overall, one in three systematic reviews (26/78, 33%) did not refer to harms of the intervention anywhere in the article. Less than half of the studies included adverse events as an outcome measure, and data on absolute rates of adverse events were only provided in 28%. Most (65%) did not include any figures or tables on adverse event; however, all included these on efficacy outcomes (mean, 3 and range, 1-7). Regression analyses indicated that the use of reporting guidelines was significantly associated with better harms reporting (P = 0.04). The reporting of harms in gastroenterology systematic reviews is largely inadequate and highly asymmetrical compared with the reporting of benefits. We suggest that review authors routinely assess both efficacy and harms outcomes of an intervention and that reporting guidelines specifically targeting harms reporting be developed. Crown Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Physical activity in advanced cancer patients: a systematic review protocol.

PubMed

Lowe, Sonya S; Tan, Maria; Faily, Joan; Watanabe, Sharon M; Courneya, Kerry S

2016-03-11

Progressive, incurable cancer is associated with increased fatigue, increased muscle weakness, and reduced physical functioning, all of which negatively impact quality of life. Physical activity has demonstrated benefits on cancer-related fatigue and physical functioning in early-stage cancer patients; however, its impact on these outcomes in end-stage cancer has not been established. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the potential benefits, harms, and effects of physical activity interventions on quality of life outcomes in advanced cancer patients. A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature on physical activity in advanced cancer patients will be undertaken. Empirical quantitative studies will be considered for inclusion if they present interventional or observational data on physical activity in advanced cancer patients. Searches will be conducted in the following electronic databases: CINAHL; CIRRIE Database of International Rehabilitation Research; Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); EMBASE; MEDLINE; PEDro: the Physiotherapy Evidence Database; PQDT; PsycInfo; PubMed; REHABDATA; Scopus; SPORTDiscus; and Web of Science, to identify relevant studies of interest. Additional strategies to identify relevant studies will include citation searches and evaluation of reference lists of included articles. Titles, abstracts, and keywords of identified studies from the search strategies will be screened for inclusion criteria. Two independent reviewers will conduct quality appraisal using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies (EPHPP) and the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A descriptive summary of included studies will describe the study designs, participant and activity characteristics, and objective and patient-reported outcomes. This systematic review will summarize the current

Diabetes-related information-seeking behaviour: a systematic review.

PubMed

Kuske, Silke; Schiereck, Tim; Grobosch, Sandra; Paduch, Andrea; Droste, Sigrid; Halbach, Sarah; Icks, Andrea

2017-10-24

Information-seeking behaviour is necessary to improve knowledge on diabetes therapy and complications. Combined with other self-management skills and autonomous handling of the disease, it is essential for achieving treatment targets. However, a systematic review addressing this topic is lacking. The aims of this systematic review were to identify and analyse existing knowledge of information-seeking behaviour: (1) types information-seeking behaviour, (2) information sources, (3) the content of searched information, and (4) associated variables that may affect information-seeking behaviour. The systematic review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) requirements. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CCMed, ERIC, Journals@OVID, Deutsches Ärzteblatt and Karlsruher virtueller Katalog (KvK) databases were searched. Publications dealing with information-seeking behaviour of people with diabetes mellitus published up to June 2015 were included. A forward citation tracking was performed in September 2016 and June 2017. Additionally, an update of the two main databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL) was conducted, considering studies published up to July 2017. Studies published in languages other than English or German were excluded, as well as letters, short reports, editorials, comments and discussion papers. A study selection and the critical appraisal of the selected studies were performed independently by two reviewers. A third reviewer was consulted if any disagreement was found. Data extraction and content analysis were performed using selected dimensions of Wilson's 'model of information behaviour'. Twenty-six studies were included. Five 'types of information-seeking behaviour' were identified, e.g. passive and active search. The 'Internet' and 'healthcare professionals' were the most frequently reported sources. 'Diet', 'complications', 'exercise' and 'medications and

ICD-10 codes used to identify adverse drug events in administrative data: a systematic review.

PubMed

Hohl, Corinne M; Karpov, Andrei; Reddekopp, Lisa; Doyle-Waters, Mimi; Stausberg, Jürgen

2014-01-01

Adverse drug events, the unintended and harmful effects of medications, are important outcome measures in health services research. Yet no universally accepted set of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) revision 10 codes or coding algorithms exists to ensure their consistent identification in administrative data. Our objective was to synthesize a comprehensive set of ICD-10 codes used to identify adverse drug events. We developed a systematic search strategy and applied it to five electronic reference databases. We searched relevant medical journals, conference proceedings, electronic grey literature and bibliographies of relevant studies, and contacted content experts for unpublished studies. One author reviewed the titles and abstracts for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two authors reviewed eligible full-text articles and abstracted data in duplicate. Data were synthesized in a qualitative manner. Of 4241 titles identified, 41 were included. We found a total of 827 ICD-10 codes that have been used in the medical literature to identify adverse drug events. The median number of codes used to search for adverse drug events was 190 (IQR 156-289) with a large degree of variability between studies in the numbers and types of codes used. Authors commonly used external injury (Y40.0-59.9) and disease manifestation codes. Only two papers reported on the sensitivity of their code set. Substantial variability exists in the methods used to identify adverse drug events in administrative data. Our work may serve as a point of reference for future research and consensus building in this area.

ICD-10 codes used to identify adverse drug events in administrative data: a systematic review

PubMed Central

Hohl, Corinne M; Karpov, Andrei; Reddekopp, Lisa; Stausberg, Jürgen

2014-01-01

Background Adverse drug events, the unintended and harmful effects of medications, are important outcome measures in health services research. Yet no universally accepted set of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) revision 10 codes or coding algorithms exists to ensure their consistent identification in administrative data. Our objective was to synthesize a comprehensive set of ICD-10 codes used to identify adverse drug events. Methods We developed a systematic search strategy and applied it to five electronic reference databases. We searched relevant medical journals, conference proceedings, electronic grey literature and bibliographies of relevant studies, and contacted content experts for unpublished studies. One author reviewed the titles and abstracts for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two authors reviewed eligible full-text articles and abstracted data in duplicate. Data were synthesized in a qualitative manner. Results Of 4241 titles identified, 41 were included. We found a total of 827 ICD-10 codes that have been used in the medical literature to identify adverse drug events. The median number of codes used to search for adverse drug events was 190 (IQR 156–289) with a large degree of variability between studies in the numbers and types of codes used. Authors commonly used external injury (Y40.0–59.9) and disease manifestation codes. Only two papers reported on the sensitivity of their code set. Conclusions Substantial variability exists in the methods used to identify adverse drug events in administrative data. Our work may serve as a point of reference for future research and consensus building in this area. PMID:24222671

Poor methodological quality and reporting standards of systematic reviews in burn care management.

PubMed

Wasiak, Jason; Tyack, Zephanie; Ware, Robert; Goodwin, Nicholas; Faggion, Clovis M

2017-10-01

The methodological and reporting quality of burn-specific systematic reviews has not been established. The aim of this study was to evaluate the methodological quality of systematic reviews in burn care management. Computerised searches were performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE and The Cochrane Library through to February 2016 for systematic reviews relevant to burn care using medical subject and free-text terms such as 'burn', 'systematic review' or 'meta-analysis'. Additional studies were identified by hand-searching five discipline-specific journals. Two authors independently screened papers, extracted and evaluated methodological quality using the 11-item A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool and reporting quality using the 27-item Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Characteristics of systematic reviews associated with methodological and reporting quality were identified. Descriptive statistics and linear regression identified features associated with improved methodological quality. A total of 60 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. Six of the 11 AMSTAR items reporting on 'a priori' design, duplicate study selection, grey literature, included/excluded studies, publication bias and conflict of interest were reported in less than 50% of the systematic reviews. Of the 27 items listed for PRISMA, 13 items reporting on introduction, methods, results and the discussion were addressed in less than 50% of systematic reviews. Multivariable analyses showed that systematic reviews associated with higher methodological or reporting quality incorporated a meta-analysis (AMSTAR regression coefficient 2.1; 95% CI: 1.1, 3.1; PRISMA regression coefficient 6·3; 95% CI: 3·8, 8·7) were published in the Cochrane library (AMSTAR regression coefficient 2·9; 95% CI: 1·6, 4·2; PRISMA regression coefficient 6·1; 95% CI: 3·1, 9·2) and included a randomised control trial (AMSTAR regression

Factors that influence the implementation of e-health: a systematic review of systematic reviews (an update).

PubMed

Ross, Jamie; Stevenson, Fiona; Lau, Rosa; Murray, Elizabeth

2016-10-26

There is a significant potential for e-health to deliver cost-effective, quality health care, and spending on e-health systems by governments and healthcare systems is increasing worldwide. However, there remains a tension between the use of e-health in this way and implementation. Furthermore, the large body of reviews in the e-health implementation field, often based on one particular technology, setting or health condition make it difficult to access a comprehensive and comprehensible summary of available evidence to help plan and undertake implementation. This review provides an update and re-analysis of a systematic review of the e-health implementation literature culminating in a set of accessible and usable recommendations for anyone involved or interested in the implementation of e-health. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and The Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between 2009 and 2014. Studies were included if they were systematic reviews of the implementation of e-health. Data from included studies were synthesised using the principles of meta-ethnography, and categorisation of the data was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Forty-four reviews mainly from North America and Europe were included. A range of e-health technologies including electronic medical records and clinical decision support systems were represented. Healthcare settings included primary care, secondary care and home care. Factors important for implementation were identified at the levels of the following: the individual e-health technology, the outer setting, the inner setting and the individual health professionals as well as the process of implementation. This systematic review of reviews provides a synthesis of the literature that both acknowledges the multi-level complexity of e-health implementation and provides an accessible and useful guide for those planning implementation. New interpretations of a large amount of data

Strategies to identify and reduce opioid misuse among patients with gastrointestinal disorders: A systematic scoping review

PubMed Central

Balbale, Salva N.; Trivedi, Itishree; O’Dwyer, Linda C.; McHugh, Megan C.; Evans, Charlesnika T.; Jordan, Neil; Keefer, Laurie A.

2018-01-01

Background Scoping reviews are preliminary assessments intended to characterize the extent and nature of emerging research evidence, identify literature gaps, and offer directions for future research. We conducted a systematic scoping review to describe published scientific literature on strategies to identify and reduce opioid misuse among patients with gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and disorders. Methods We performed structured keyword searches to identify manuscripts published through June 2016 in the PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to extract original research articles that described health care practices, tools or interventions to identify and reduce opioid misuse among GI patients. The Chronic Care Model (CCM) was used to classify the strategies presented. Results Twelve articles met the inclusion criteria. A majority of studies used quasi-experimental or retrospective cohort study designs. Most studies addressed the CCM’s clinical information systems element. Seven studies involved identification of opioid misuse through prescription drug monitoring and opioid misuse screening tools. Four studies discussed reductions in opioid use by harnessing drug monitoring data and individual care plans, and implementing self-management and opioid detoxification interventions. One study described drug monitoring and an audit-and-feedback intervention to both identify and reduce opioid misuse. Greatest reductions in opioid misuse were observed when drug monitoring, self-management, or audit-and-feedback interventions were used. Conclusions Prescription drug monitoring and self-management interventions may be promising strategies to identify and reduce opioid misuse in gastrointestinal care. Rigorous, empirical research is needed to evaluate the longer-term impact of these strategies. PMID:28780607

Strategies to Identify and Reduce Opioid Misuse Among Patients with Gastrointestinal Disorders: A Systematic Scoping Review.

PubMed

Balbale, Salva N; Trivedi, Itishree; O'Dwyer, Linda C; McHugh, Megan C; Evans, Charlesnika T; Jordan, Neil; Keefer, Laurie A

2017-10-01

Scoping reviews are preliminary assessments intended to characterize the extent and nature of emerging research evidence, identify literature gaps, and offer directions for future research. We conducted a systematic scoping review to describe published scientific literature on strategies to identify and reduce opioid misuse among patients with gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and disorders. We performed structured keyword searches to identify manuscripts published through June 2016 in the PubMed MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to extract original research articles that described healthcare practices, tools, or interventions to identify and reduce opioid misuse among GI patients. The Chronic Care Model (CCM) was used to classify the strategies presented. Twelve articles met the inclusion criteria. A majority of studies used quasi-experimental or retrospective cohort study designs. Most studies addressed the CCM's clinical information systems element. Seven studies involved identification of opioid misuse through prescription drug monitoring and opioid misuse screening tools. Four studies discussed reductions in opioid use by harnessing drug monitoring data and individual care plans, and implementing self-management and opioid detoxification interventions. One study described drug monitoring and an audit-and-feedback intervention to both identify and reduce opioid misuse. Greatest reductions in opioid misuse were observed when drug monitoring, self-management, or audit-and-feedback interventions were used. Prescription drug monitoring and self-management interventions may be promising strategies to identify and reduce opioid misuse in GI care. Rigorous, empirical research is needed to evaluate the longer-term impact of these strategies.

The ICF Core Sets for hearing loss--researcher perspective. Part I: Systematic review of outcome measures identified in audiological research.

PubMed

Granberg, Sarah; Dahlström, Jennie; Möller, Claes; Kähäri, Kim; Danermark, Berth

2014-02-01

To review the literature in order to identify outcome measures used in research on adults with hearing loss (HL) as part of the ICF Core Sets development project, and to describe study and population characteristics of the reviewed studies. A systematic review methodology was applied using multiple databases. A comprehensive search was conducted and two search pools were created, pool I and pool II. The study population included adults (≥ 18 years of age) with HL and oral language as the primary mode of communication. 122 studies were included. Outcome measures were distinguished by 'instrument type', and 10 types were identified. In total, 246 (pool I) and 122 (pool II) different measures were identified, and only approximately 20% were extracted twice or more. Most measures were related to speech recognition. Fifty-one different questionnaires were identified. Many studies used small sample sizes, and the sex of participants was not revealed in several studies. The low prevalence of identified measures reflects a lack of consensus regarding the optimal outcome measures to use in audiology. Reflections and discussions are made in relation to small sample sizes and the lack of sex differentiation/descriptions within the included articles.

Lurasidone in the Treatment of Bipolar Depression: Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

PubMed Central

Perna, Giampaolo; Solmi, Marco; Veronese, Nicola; Buonaguro, Elisabetta Filomena; Köhler, Cristiano André; de Bartolomeis, Andrea

2017-01-01

Introduction A burgeoning number of systematic reviews considering lurasidone in the treatment of bipolar depression have occurred since its Food and Drug Administration extended approval in 2013. While a paucity of available quantitative evidence still precludes preliminary meta-analysis on the matter, the present quality assessment of systematic review of systematic reviews, nonetheless, aims at highlighting current essential information on the topic. Methods Both published and unpublished systematic reviews about lurasidone mono- or adjunctive therapy in the treatment of bipolar depression were searched by two independent authors inquiring PubMed/Cochrane/Embase/Scopus from inception until October 2016. Results Twelve included systematic reviews were of moderate-to-high quality and consistent in covering the handful of RCTs available to date, suggesting the promising efficacy, safety, and tolerability profile of lurasidone. Concordance on the drug profile seems to be corroborated by a steadily increasing number of convergent qualitative reports on the matter. Limitations Publication, sponsorship, language, citation, and measurement biases. Conclusions Despite being preliminary in nature, this overview stipulates the effectiveness of lurasidone in the acute treatment of Type I bipolar depression overall. As outlined by most of the reviewed evidence, recommendations for future research should include further controlled trials of extended duration. PMID:28573138

Help Options in CALL: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cardenas-Claros, Monica S.; Gruba, Paul A.

2009-01-01

This paper is a systematic review of research investigating help options in the different language skills in computer-assisted language learning (CALL). In this review, emerging themes along with is-sues affecting help option research are identified and discussed. We argue that help options in CALL are application resources that do not only seem…

Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: A systematic review

PubMed Central

2011-01-01

Background Systematic reviews have the potential to inform decisions made by health policymakers and managers, yet little is known about the impact of interventions to increase the use of systematic reviews by these groups in decision making. Methods We systematically reviewed the evidence on the impact of interventions for seeking, appraising, and applying evidence from systematic reviews in decision making by health policymakers or managers. Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment Database, and LISA were searched from the earliest date available until April 2010. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion if the intervention intended to increase seeking, appraising, or applying evidence from systematic reviews by a health policymaker or manager. Minimum inclusion criteria were a description of the study population and availability of extractable data. Results 11,297 titles and abstracts were reviewed, leading to retrieval of 37 full-text articles for assessment; four of these articles met all inclusion criteria. Three articles described one study where five systematic reviews were mailed to public health officials and followed up with surveys at three months and two years. The articles reported from 23% to 63% of respondents declaring they had used systematic reviews in policymaking decisions. One randomised trial indicated that tailored messages combined with access to a registry of systematic reviews had a significant effect on policies made in the area of healthy body weight promotion in health departments. Conclusions The limited empirical data renders the strength of evidence weak for the effectiveness and the types of interventions that encourage health policymakers and managers to use systematic reviews in decision making. PMID:21524292

Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: a systematic review.

PubMed

Perrier, Laure; Mrklas, Kelly; Lavis, John N; Straus, Sharon E

2011-04-27

Systematic reviews have the potential to inform decisions made by health policymakers and managers, yet little is known about the impact of interventions to increase the use of systematic reviews by these groups in decision making. We systematically reviewed the evidence on the impact of interventions for seeking, appraising, and applying evidence from systematic reviews in decision making by health policymakers or managers. Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment Database, and LISA were searched from the earliest date available until April 2010. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion if the intervention intended to increase seeking, appraising, or applying evidence from systematic reviews by a health policymaker or manager. Minimum inclusion criteria were a description of the study population and availability of extractable data. 11,297 titles and abstracts were reviewed, leading to retrieval of 37 full-text articles for assessment; four of these articles met all inclusion criteria. Three articles described one study where five systematic reviews were mailed to public health officials and followed up with surveys at three months and two years. The articles reported from 23% to 63% of respondents declaring they had used systematic reviews in policymaking decisions. One randomised trial indicated that tailored messages combined with access to a registry of systematic reviews had a significant effect on policies made in the area of healthy body weight promotion in health departments. The limited empirical data renders the strength of evidence weak for the effectiveness and the types of interventions that encourage health policymakers and managers to use systematic reviews in decision making.

Surgical interventions for gastric cancer: a review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

He, Weiling; Tu, Jian; Huo, Zijun; Li, Yuhuang; Peng, Jintao; Qiu, Zhenwen; Luo, Dandong; Ke, Zunfu; Chen, Xinlin

2015-01-01

To evaluate methodological quality and the extent of concordance among meta-analysis and/or systematic reviews on surgical interventions for gastric cancer (GC). A comprehensive search of PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane library and the DARE database was conducted to identify the reviews comparing different surgical interventions for GC prior to April 2014. After applying included criteria, available data were summarized and appraised by the Oxman and Guyatt scale. Fifty six reviews were included. Forty five reviews (80.4%) were well conducted, with scores of adapted Oxman and Guyatt scale ≥ 14. The reviews differed in criteria for avoiding bias and assessing the validity of the primary studies. Many primary studies displayed major methodological flaws, such as randomization, allocation concealment, and dropouts and withdrawals. According to the concordance assessment, laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) was superior to open gastrectomy, and laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy was superior to open distal gastrectomy in short-term outcomes. However, the concordance regarding other surgical interventions, such as D1 vs. D2 lymphadenectomy, and robotic gastrectomy vs. LAG were absent. Systematic reviews on surgical interventions for GC displayed relatively high methodological quality. The improvement of methodological quality and reporting was necessary for primary studies. The superiority of laparoscopic over open surgery was demonstrated. But concordance on other surgical interventions was rare, which needed more well-designed RCTs and systematic reviews.

Predictors of Post-School Success: A Systematic Review of NLTS2 Secondary Analyses

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Mazzotti, Valerie L.; Rowe, Dawn A.; Sinclair, James; Poppen, Marcus; Woods, William E.; Shearer, Mackenzie L.

2016-01-01

The purpose of this systematic review was to (a) systematically review the literature to identify National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 secondary analyses articles published since 2009 that met the quality indicators for correlational research, (b) further extend the findings of Test et al. by identifying additional evidence to support the…

Collaborative Principal Preparation Programs: A Systematic Review and Synthesis of Qualitative Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Parylo, Oksana

2013-01-01

The purpose of this systematic review was to (1) conduct the systematic search of the literature to identify the studies on partnerships in school leader preparation; and to (2) systematically review the findings of these studies and synthesize them into major themes reflecting the state of the art in collaborative leadership preparation in the…

A low proportion of systematic reviews in physical therapy are registered: a survey of 150 published systematic reviews.

PubMed

Oliveira, Crystian B; Elkins, Mark R; Lemes, Ítalo Ribeiro; de Oliveira Silva, Danilo; Briani, Ronaldo V; Monteiro, Henrique Luiz; Azevedo, Fábio Mícolis de; Pinto, Rafael Zambelli

Systematic reviews provide the best evidence about the effectiveness of healthcare interventions. Although systematic reviews are conducted with explicit and transparent methods, discrepancies might occur between the protocol and the publication. To estimate the proportion of systematic reviews of physical therapy interventions that are registered, the methodological quality of (un)registered systematic reviews and the prevalence of outcome reporting bias in registered systematic reviews. A random sample of 150 systematic reviews published in 2015 indexed on the PEDro database. We included systematic reviews written in English, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish. A checklist for assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews tool was used. Relative risk was calculated to explore the association between meta-analysis results and the changes in the outcomes. Twenty-nine (19%) systematic reviews were registered. Funding and publication in a journal with an impact factor higher than 5.0 were associated with registration. Registered systematic reviews demonstrated significantly higher methodological quality (median=8) than unregistered systematic reviews (median=5). Nine (31%) registered systematic reviews demonstrated discrepancies between protocol and publication with no evidence that such discrepancies were applied to favor the statistical significance of the intervention (RR=1.16; 95% CI: 0.63-2.12). A low proportion of systematic reviews in the physical therapy field are registered. The registered systematic reviews showed high methodological quality without evidence of outcome reporting bias. Further strategies should be implemented to encourage registration. Copyright © 2017 Associação Brasileira de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação em Fisioterapia. Publicado por Elsevier Editora Ltda. All rights reserved.

Research on Teaching Practicum--A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Lawson, Tony; Çakmak, Melek; Gündüz, Müge; Busher, Hugh

2015-01-01

The aim of the present study is to conduct a systematic review research which focuses on research studies into the school practicum. In order to identify the main issues and also to provide a contemporary picture of practicum, 114 studies published on the topic are reviewed and analysed in terms of: (i) aims, (ii) main participants, (iii)…

Instruments to Identify Prescription Medication Misuse, Abuse, and Related Events in Clinical Trials: An ACTTION Systematic Review.

PubMed

Smith, Shannon M; Paillard, Florence; McKeown, Andrew; Burke, Laurie B; Edwards, Robert R; Katz, Nathaniel P; Papadopoulos, Elektra J; Rappaport, Bob A; Slagle, Ashley; Strain, Eric C; Wasan, Ajay D; Turk, Dennis C; Dworkin, Robert H

2015-05-01

Measurement of inappropriate medication use events (eg, abuse or misuse) in clinical trials is important in characterizing a medication's abuse potential. However, no gold standard assessment of inappropriate use events in clinical trials has been identified. In this systematic review, we examine the measurement properties (ie, content validity, cross-sectional reliability and construct validity, longitudinal construct validity, ability to detect change, and responder definitions) of instruments assessing inappropriate use of opioid and nonopioid prescription medications to identify any that meet U.S. and European regulatory agencies' rigorous standards for outcome measures in clinical trials. Sixteen published instruments were identified, most of which were not designed for the selected concept of interest and context of use. For this reason, many instruments were found to lack adequate content validity (or documentation of content validity) to evaluate current inappropriate medication use events; for example, evaluating inappropriate use across the life span rather than current use, including items that did not directly assess inappropriate use (eg, questions about anger), or failing to capture information pertinent to inappropriate use events (eg, intention and route of administration). In addition, the psychometric data across all instruments were generally limited in scope. A further limitation is the heterogeneous, nonstandardized use of inappropriate medication use terminology. These observations suggest that available instruments are not well suited for assessing current inappropriate medication use within the specific context of clinical trials. Further effort is needed to develop reliable and valid instruments to measure current inappropriate medication use events in clinical trials. This systematic review evaluates the measurement properties of inappropriate medication use (eg, abuse or misuse) instruments to determine whether any meet regulatory

SWIFT-Review: a text-mining workbench for systematic review.

PubMed

Howard, Brian E; Phillips, Jason; Miller, Kyle; Tandon, Arpit; Mav, Deepak; Shah, Mihir R; Holmgren, Stephanie; Pelch, Katherine E; Walker, Vickie; Rooney, Andrew A; Macleod, Malcolm; Shah, Ruchir R; Thayer, Kristina

2016-05-23

There is growing interest in using machine learning approaches to priority rank studies and reduce human burden in screening literature when conducting systematic reviews. In addition, identifying addressable questions during the problem formulation phase of systematic review can be challenging, especially for topics having a large literature base. Here, we assess the performance of the SWIFT-Review priority ranking algorithm for identifying studies relevant to a given research question. We also explore the use of SWIFT-Review during problem formulation to identify, categorize, and visualize research areas that are data rich/data poor within a large literature corpus. Twenty case studies, including 15 public data sets, representing a range of complexity and size, were used to assess the priority ranking performance of SWIFT-Review. For each study, seed sets of manually annotated included and excluded titles and abstracts were used for machine training. The remaining references were then ranked for relevance using an algorithm that considers term frequency and latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) topic modeling. This ranking was evaluated with respect to (1) the number of studies screened in order to identify 95 % of known relevant studies and (2) the "Work Saved over Sampling" (WSS) performance metric. To assess SWIFT-Review for use in problem formulation, PubMed literature search results for 171 chemicals implicated as EDCs were uploaded into SWIFT-Review (264,588 studies) and categorized based on evidence stream and health outcome. Patterns of search results were surveyed and visualized using a variety of interactive graphics. Compared with the reported performance of other tools using the same datasets, the SWIFT-Review ranking procedure obtained the highest scores on 11 out of 15 of the public datasets. Overall, these results suggest that using machine learning to triage documents for screening has the potential to save, on average, more than 50 % of the screening

The effectiveness of e-Interventions on reducing social isolation in older persons: A systematic review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Chipps, Jennifer; Jarvis, Mary Ann; Ramlall, Suvira

2017-12-01

As the older adult population group has been increasing in size, there has been evidence of growing social isolation and loneliness in their lives. The increased use of information communication technology and Internet-supported interventions has stimulated an interest in the benefits of e-Interventions for older people and specifically in having a role in increasing social networks and decreasing loneliness. A systematic review of e-Interventions to reduce loneliness in older people was conducted with the aim to synthesize high quality evidence on the effectiveness of e-Interventions to decrease social isolation/loneliness for older people living in community/residential care. A systematic search of 12 databases for reviews published between 2000-2017 was conducted using search term synonyms for older people, social isolation and interventions. Three independent researchers screened articles and two reviewers extracted data. The Revised-Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews was used to assess the quality of reviews. The final search identified 12 reviews, which included 22 unique primary research studies evaluating e-Interventions for social isolation or loneliness. The reviews were of moderate quality and the primary studies showed a lack of rigor. Loneliness was most frequently measured using the University California Los Angeles Loneliness Scale. Despite the limitations of the reviewed studies, there is inconsistent and weak evidence on using e-Interventions for loneliness in older people.

Pain assessment for people with dementia: a systematic review of systematic reviews of pain assessment tools.

PubMed

Lichtner, Valentina; Dowding, Dawn; Esterhuizen, Philip; Closs, S José; Long, Andrew F; Corbett, Anne; Briggs, Michelle

2014-12-17

There is evidence of under-detection and poor management of pain in patients with dementia, in both long-term and acute care. Accurate assessment of pain in people with dementia is challenging and pain assessment tools have received considerable attention over the years, with an increasing number of tools made available. Systematic reviews on the evidence of their validity and utility mostly compare different sets of tools. This review of systematic reviews analyses and summarises evidence concerning the psychometric properties and clinical utility of pain assessment tools in adults with dementia or cognitive impairment. We searched for systematic reviews of pain assessment tools providing evidence of reliability, validity and clinical utility. Two reviewers independently assessed each review and extracted data from them, with a third reviewer mediating when consensus was not reached. Analysis of the data was carried out collaboratively. The reviews were synthesised using a narrative synthesis approach. We retrieved 441 potentially eligible reviews, 23 met the criteria for inclusion and 8 provided data for extraction. Each review evaluated between 8 and 13 tools, in aggregate providing evidence on a total of 28 tools. The quality of the reviews varied and the reporting often lacked sufficient methodological detail for quality assessment. The 28 tools appear to have been studied in a variety of settings and with varied types of patients. The reviews identified several methodological limitations across the original studies. The lack of a 'gold standard' significantly hinders the evaluation of tools' validity. Most importantly, the samples were small providing limited evidence for use of any of the tools across settings or populations. There are a considerable number of pain assessment tools available for use with the elderly cognitive impaired population. However there is limited evidence about their reliability, validity and clinical utility. On the basis of this

The methodological quality of systematic reviews published in high-impact nursing journals: a review of the literature.

PubMed

Pölkki, Tarja; Kanste, Outi; Kääriäinen, Maria; Elo, Satu; Kyngäs, Helvi

2014-02-01

To analyse systematic review articles published in the top 10 nursing journals to determine the quality of the methods employed within them. Systematic review is defined as a scientific research method that synthesises high-quality scientific knowledge on a given topic. The number of such reviews in nursing science has increased dramatically during recent years, but their methodological quality has not previously been assessed. A review of the literature using a narrative approach. Ranked impact factor scores for nursing journals were obtained from the Journal Citation Report database of the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI Web of Knowledge). All issues from the years 2009 and 2010 of the top 10 ranked journals were included. CINAHL and MEDLINE databases were searched to locate studies using the search terms 'systematic review' and 'systematic literature review'. A total of 39 eligible studies were identified. Their methodological quality was evaluated through the specific criteria of quality assessment, description of synthesis and strengths and weaknesses reported in the included studies. Most of the eligible systematic reviews included several different designs or types of quantitative study. The majority included a quality assessment, and a total of 17 different criteria were identified. The method of synthesis was mentioned in about half of the reviews, the most common being narrative synthesis. The weaknesses of reviews were discussed, while strengths were rarely highlighted. The methodological quality of the systematic reviews examined varied considerably, although they were all published in nursing journals with a high-impact factor. Despite the fact that systematic reviews are considered the most robust source of research evidence, they vary in methodological quality. This point is important to consider in clinical practice when applying the results to patient care. © 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Identifying and prioritising systematic review topics with public health stakeholders: A protocol for a modified Delphi study in Switzerland to inform future research agendas

PubMed Central

Mütsch, Margot; Kien, Christina; Gerhardus, Ansgar; Lhachimi, Stefan K

2017-01-01

Introduction The Cochrane Collaboration aims to produce relevant and top priority evidence that responds to existing evidence gaps. Hence, research priority setting (RPS) is important to identify which potential research gaps are deemed most important. Moreover, RPS supports future health research to conform both health and health evidence needs. However, studies that are prioritising systematic review topics in public health are surprisingly rare. Therefore, to inform the research agenda of Cochrane Public Health Europe (CPHE), we introduce the protocol of a priority setting study on systematic review topics in several European countries, which is conceptualised as pilot. Methods and analysis We will conduct a two-round modified Delphi study in Switzerland, incorporating an anonymous web-based questionnaire, to assess which topics should be prioritised for systematic reviews in public health. In the first Delphi round public health stakeholders will suggest relevant assessment criteria and potential priority topics. In the second Delphi round the participants indicate their (dis)agreement to the aggregated results of the first round and rate the potential review topics with the predetermined criteria on a four-point Likert scale. As we invite a wide variety of stakeholders we will compare the results between the different stakeholder groups. Ethics and dissemination We have received ethical approval from the ethical board of the University of Bremen, Germany (principal investigation is conducted at the University of Bremen) and a certificate of non-objection from the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland (fieldwork will be conducted in Switzerland). The results of this study will be further disseminated through peer reviewed publication and will support systematic review author groups (i.a. CPHE) to improve the relevance of the groups´ future review work. Finally, the proposed priority setting study can be used as a framework by other systematic review groups when

Interventions to Reduce Adult Nursing Turnover: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.

PubMed

Halter, Mary; Pelone, Ferruccio; Boiko, Olga; Beighton, Carole; Harris, Ruth; Gale, Julia; Gourlay, Stephen; Drennan, Vari

2017-01-01

Nurse turnover is an issue of concern in health care systems internationally. Understanding which interventions are effective to reduce turnover rates is important to managers and health care organisations. Despite a plethora of reviews of such interventions, strength of evidence is hard to determine. We aimed to review literature on interventions to reduce turnover in nurses working in the adult health care services in developed economies. We conducted an overview (systematic review of systematic reviews) using the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, CINAHL plus and SCOPUS and forward searching. We included reviews published between 1990 and January 2015 in English. We carried out parallel blinded selection, extraction of data and assessment of bias, using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews. We carried out a narrative synthesis. Despite the large body of published reviews, only seven reviews met the inclusion criteria. These provide moderate quality review evidence, albeit from poorly controlled primary studies. They provide evidence of effect of a small number of interventions which decrease turnover or increase retention of nurses, these being preceptorship of new graduates and leadership for group cohesion. We highlight that a large body of reviews does not equate with a large body of high quality evidence. Agreement as to the measures and terminology to be used together with well-designed, funded primary research to provide robust evidence for nurse and human resource managers to base their nurse retention strategies on is urgently required.

Using qualitative comparative analysis in a systematic review of a complex intervention.

PubMed

Kahwati, Leila; Jacobs, Sara; Kane, Heather; Lewis, Megan; Viswanathan, Meera; Golin, Carol E

2016-05-04

Systematic reviews evaluating complex interventions often encounter substantial clinical heterogeneity in intervention components and implementation features making synthesis challenging. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) is a non-probabilistic method that uses mathematical set theory to study complex phenomena; it has been proposed as a potential method to complement traditional evidence synthesis in reviews of complex interventions to identify key intervention components or implementation features that might explain effectiveness or ineffectiveness. The objective of this study was to describe our approach in detail and examine the suitability of using QCA within the context of a systematic review. We used data from a completed systematic review of behavioral interventions to improve medication adherence to conduct two substantive analyses using QCA. The first analysis sought to identify combinations of nine behavior change techniques/components (BCTs) found among effective interventions, and the second analysis sought to identify combinations of five implementation features (e.g., agent, target, mode, time span, exposure) found among effective interventions. For each substantive analysis, we reframed the review's research questions to be designed for use with QCA, calibrated sets (i.e., transformed raw data into data used in analysis), and identified the necessary and/or sufficient combinations of BCTs and implementation features found in effective interventions. Our application of QCA for each substantive analysis is described in detail. We extended the original review findings by identifying seven combinations of BCTs and four combinations of implementation features that were sufficient for improving adherence. We found reasonable alignment between several systematic review steps and processes used in QCA except that typical approaches to study abstraction for some intervention components and features did not support a robust calibration for QCA. QCA was

Office design and health: a systematic review.

PubMed

Richardson, Ann; Potter, John; Paterson, Margaret; Harding, Thomas; Tyler-Merrick, Gaye; Kirk, Ray; Reid, Kate; McChesney, Jane

2017-12-15

To carry out a systematic review of recent research into the effects of workplace design, comparing individual with shared workspaces, on the health of employees. The research question was "Does workplace design (specifically individual offices compared with shared workspaces) affect the health of workers?" A literature search limited to articles published between 2000 and 2017 was undertaken. A systematic review was carried out, and the findings of the reviewed studies grouped into themes according to the primary outcomes measured in the studies. The literature search identified 15 relevant studies addressing health effects of shared or open-plan offices compared with individual offices. Our systematic review found that, compared with individual offices, shared or open-plan office space is not beneficial to employees' health, with consistent findings of deleterious effects on staff health, wellbeing and productivity. Our findings are also consistent with those of earlier reviews. These findings have public health implications for the New Zealand workforce. Decisions about workplace design should include weighing the short-term financial benefits of open-plan or shared workspaces against the significant harms, including increased sickness absence, lower job satisfaction and productivity, and possible threats to recruitment and retention of staff.

The Use of Online Posts to Identify Barriers to and Facilitators of HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Among Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Comparison to a Systematic Review of the Peer-Reviewed Literature.

PubMed

Hannaford, Alisse; Lipshie-Williams, Madeleine; Starrels, Joanna L; Arnsten, Julia H; Rizzuto, Jessica; Cohen, Phillip; Jacobs, Damon; Patel, Viraj V

2018-04-01

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) remains an under-utilized HIV prevention tool among men who have sex with men (MSM). To more comprehensively elucidate barriers and facilitators to PrEP use among US MSM, we conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed published articles and content analysis of online posts about PrEP. We searched peer-reviewed databases (Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar) using MESH headings and keywords about PrEP and/or HIV prevention from 2005 to 2015. We included original studies among MSM in the US that reported on barriers, facilitators, or other factors related to PrEP use. We also searched online posts and associated comments (news articles, opinion pieces, blogs and other social media posts) in diverse venues (Facebook, Slate Outward, Huffington Post Gay Voices, Queerty, and My PrEP Experience blog) to identify posts about PrEP. We used content analysis to identify themes and compare potential differences between the peer-reviewed literature and online posts. We identified 25 peer-reviewed articles and 28 online posts meeting inclusion criteria. We identified 48 unique barriers and 46 facilitators to using PrEP. These 94 themes fit into six overarching categories: (1) access (n = 14), (2) attitudes/beliefs (n = 24), (3) attributes of PrEP (n = 13), (4) behaviors (n = 11), (5) sociodemographic characteristics (n = 8), and (6) social network (n = 6). In all categories, analysis of online posts resulted in identification of a greater number of unique themes. Thirty-eight themes were identified in the online posts that were not identified in the peer-reviewed literature. We identified barriers and facilitators to PrEP in online posts that were not identified in a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature. By incorporating data both from a systematic review of peer-reviewed articles and from online posts, we have identified salient and novel information about barriers to and facilitators of PrEP use. Traditional

Prevention and self-management interventions are top priorities for osteoarthritis systematic reviews.

PubMed

Jaramillo, Alejandra; Welch, Vivian A; Ueffing, Erin; Gruen, Russell L; Bragge, Peter; Lyddiatt, Anne; Tugwell, Peter

2013-05-01

To identify high-priority research questions for osteoarthritis systematic reviews with consideration of health equity and the social determinants of health (SDH). We consulted with experts and conducted a literature search to identify a priority-setting method that could be adapted to address the health equity and SDH. We selected the Global Evidence Mapping priority-setting method, and through consultations and consensus, we adapted the method to meet our objectives. This involves developing an evidence map of the existing systematic reviews on osteoarthritis; conducting one face-to-face workshop with patients and another one with clinicians, researchers, and patients; and conducting an online survey of patients to rank the top 10 research questions. We piloted the adapted method with the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group to set research priorities for osteoarthritis. Our focus was on systematic reviews: we identified 34 high-priority research questions for osteoarthritis systematic reviews. Prevention and self-management interventions, mainly diet and exercise, are top priorities for osteoarthritis systematic reviews. Evaluation against our predefined objectives showed that this method did prioritize SDH (50% of the research questions considered SDH). There were marked gaps: no high-priority topics were identified for access to care until patients had advanced disease-lifestyle changes once the disease was diagnosed. This method was felt feasible if conducted annually. We confirmed the utility of an adapted priority-setting method that is feasible and considers SDH. Further testing of this method is needed to assess whether considerations of health equity are prioritized and involve disadvantaged groups of the population. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The effectiveness of evidence summaries on health policymakers and health system managers use of evidence from systematic reviews: a systematic review.

PubMed

Petkovic, Jennifer; Welch, Vivian; Jacob, Maria Helena; Yoganathan, Manosila; Ayala, Ana Patricia; Cunningham, Heather; Tugwell, Peter

2016-12-09

Systematic reviews are important for decision makers. They offer many potential benefits but are often written in technical language, are too long, and do not contain contextual details which make them hard to use for decision-making. There are many organizations that develop and disseminate derivative products, such as evidence summaries, from systematic reviews for different populations or subsets of decision makers. This systematic review aimed to (1) assess the effectiveness of evidence summaries on policymakers' use of the evidence and (2) identify the most effective summary components for increasing policymakers' use of the evidence. We present an overview of the available evidence on systematic review derivative products. We included studies of policymakers at all levels as well as health system managers. We included studies examining any type of "evidence summary," "policy brief," or other products derived from systematic reviews that presented evidence in a summarized form. The primary outcomes were the (1) use of systematic review summaries in decision-making (e.g., self-reported use of the evidence in policymaking and decision-making) and (2) policymakers' understanding, knowledge, and/or beliefs (e.g., changes in knowledge scores about the topic included in the summary). We also assessed perceived relevance, credibility, usefulness, understandability, and desirability (e.g., format) of the summaries. Our database search combined with our gray literature search yielded 10,113 references after removal of duplicates. From these, 54 were reviewed in full text, and we included six studies (reported in seven papers) as well as protocols from two ongoing studies. Two studies assessed the use of evidence summaries in decision-making and found little to no difference in effect. There was also little to no difference in effect for knowledge, understanding or beliefs (four studies), and perceived usefulness or usability (three studies). Summary of findings tables

How to write a systematic review.

PubMed

Harris, Joshua D; Quatman, Carmen E; Manring, M M; Siston, Robert A; Flanigan, David C

2014-11-01

The role of evidence-based medicine in sports medicine and orthopaedic surgery is rapidly growing. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are also proliferating in the medical literature. To provide the outline necessary for a practitioner to properly understand and/or conduct a systematic review for publication in a sports medicine journal. Review. The steps of a successful systematic review include the following: identification of an unanswered answerable question; explicit definitions of the investigation's participant(s), intervention(s), comparison(s), and outcome(s); utilization of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines and PROSPERO registration; thorough systematic data extraction; and appropriate grading of the evidence and strength of the recommendations. An outline to understand and conduct a systematic review is provided, and the difference between meta-analyses and systematic reviews is described. The steps necessary to perform a systematic review are fully explained, including the study purpose, search methodology, data extraction, reporting of results, identification of bias, and reporting of the study's main findings. Systematic reviews or meta-analyses critically appraise and formally synthesize the best existing evidence to provide a statement of conclusion that answers specific clinical questions. Readers and reviewers, however, must recognize that the quality and strength of recommendations in a review are only as strong as the quality of studies that it analyzes. Thus, great care must be used in the interpretation of bias and extrapolation of the review's findings to translation to clinical practice. Without advanced education on the topic, the reader may follow the steps discussed herein to perform a systematic review. © 2013 The Author(s).

Cyber threats to health information systems: A systematic review.

PubMed

Luna, Raul; Rhine, Emily; Myhra, Matthew; Sullivan, Ross; Kruse, Clemens Scott

2016-01-01

Recent legislation empowering providers to embrace the electronic exchange of health information leaves the healthcare industry increasingly vulnerable to cybercrime. The objective of this systematic review is to identify the biggest threats to healthcare via cybercrime. The rationale behind this systematic review is to provide a framework for future research by identifying themes and trends of cybercrime in the healthcare industry. The authors conducted a systematic search through the CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, PubMed, and ScienceDirect databases to gather literature relative to cyber threats in healthcare. All authors reviewed the articles collected and excluded literature that did not focus on the objective. Researchers selected and examined 19 articles for common themes. The most prevalent cyber-criminal activity in healthcare is identity theft through data breach. Other concepts identified are internal threats, external threats, cyber-squatting, and cyberterrorism. The industry has now come to rely heavily on digital technologies, which increase risks such as denial of service and data breaches. Current healthcare cyber-security systems do not rival the capabilities of cyber criminals. Security of information is a costly resource and therefore many HCOs may hesitate to invest what is required to protect sensitive information.

Methodological quality and reporting of systematic reviews in hand and wrist pathology.

PubMed

Wasiak, J; Shen, A Y; Ware, R; O'Donohoe, T J; Faggion, C M

2017-10-01

The objective of this study was to assess methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews in hand and wrist pathology. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to November 2016 for relevant studies. Reporting quality was evaluated using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and methodological quality using a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews, the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Descriptive statistics and linear regression were used to identify features associated with improved methodological quality. A total of 91 studies were included in the analysis. Most reviews inadequately reported PRISMA items regarding study protocol, search strategy and bias and AMSTAR items regarding protocol, publication bias and funding. Systematic reviews published in a plastics journal, or which included more authors, were associated with higher AMSTAR scores. A large proportion of systematic reviews within hand and wrist pathology literature score poorly with validated methodological assessment tools, which may affect the reliability of their conclusions. I.

Challenges of Systematic Reviewing Integrative Health Care

PubMed Central

Coulter, Ian D.; Khorsan, Raheleh; Crawford, Cindy; Hsiao, An-Fu

2013-01-01

This article is based on an extensive review of integrative medicine (IM) and integrative health care (IHC). Since there is no general agreement of what constitutes IM/IHC, several major problems were identified that make the review of work in this field problematic. In applying the systematic review methodology, we found that many of those captured articles that used the term integrative medicine were in actuality referring to adjunctive, complementary, or supplemental medicine. The objective of this study was to apply a sensitivity analysis to demonstrate how the results of a systematic review of IM and IHC will differ according to what inclusion criteria is used based on the definition of IM/IHC. By analyzing 4 different scenarios, the authors show that, due to unclear usage of these terms, results vary dramatically, exposing an inconsistent literature base for this field. PMID:23843689

Kawasaki disease and immunisation: A systematic review.

PubMed

Phuong, Linny Kimly; Bonetto, Caterina; Buttery, Jim; Pernus, Yolanda Brauchli; Chandler, Rebecca; Felicetti, Patrizia; Goldenthal, Karen L; Kucuku, Merita; Monaco, Giuseppe; Pahud, Barbara; Shulman, Stanford T; Top, Karina A; Trotta, Francesco; Ulloa-Gutierrez, Rolando; Varricchio, Frederick; de Ferranti, Sarah; Newburger, Jane W; Dahdah, Nagib; Singh, Surjit; Bonhoeffer, Jan; Burgner, David

2017-03-27

Kawasaki disease is a complex and potentially serious condition. It has been observed in temporal relation to immunisation. We conducted a systematic literature review using various reference sources to review the available evidence published in the literature. We identified twenty seven publications reporting a temporal association between immunisation and Kawasaki disease. We present a systematic review of data drawn from randomised controlled trials, observational studies, case series and reports, and reviews. Overall there was a lack of standardised case definitions, making data interpretation and comparability challenging. Although a temporal relationship between immunisation and Kawasaki disease is suggested, evidence for an increased risk or a causal association is lacking. Implementation of a standardised Kawasaki disease case definition would increase confidence in the findings and add value to future studies of pre- or post-licensure vaccine safety studies. Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Policy-Relevant Systematic Reviews to Strengthen Health Systems: Models and Mechanisms to Support Their Production

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Oliver, Sandra; Dickson, Kelly

2016-01-01

Support for producing systematic reviews about health systems is less well developed than for those about clinical practice. From interviewing policy makers and systematic reviewers we identified institutional mechanisms which bring systematic reviews and policy priorities closer by harnessing organisational and individual motivations, emphasising…

Assessing Technical Competence in Surgical Trainees: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Szasz, Peter; Louridas, Marisa; Harris, Kenneth A; Aggarwal, Rajesh; Grantcharov, Teodor P

2015-06-01

To systematically examine the literature describing the methods by which technical competence is assessed in surgical trainees. The last decade has witnessed an evolution away from time-based surgical education. In response, governing bodies worldwide have implemented competency-based education paradigms. The definition of competence, however, remains elusive, and the impact of these education initiatives in terms of assessment methods remains unclear. A systematic review examining the methods by which technical competence is assessed was conducted by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and the Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Abstracts of retrieved studies were reviewed and those meeting inclusion criteria were selected for full review. Data were retrieved in a systematic manner, the validity and reliability of the assessment methods was evaluated, and quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation classification. Of the 6814 studies identified, 85 studies involving 2369 surgical residents were included in this review. The methods used to assess technical competence were categorized into 5 groups; Likert scales (37), benchmarks (31), binary outcomes (11), novel tools (4), and surrogate outcomes (2). Their validity and reliability were mostly previously established. The overall Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation for randomized controlled trials was high and low for the observational studies. The definition of technical competence continues to be debated within the medical literature. The methods used to evaluate technical competence predominantly include instruments that were originally created to assess technical skill. Very few studies identify standard setting approaches that differentiate competent versus noncompetent performers; subsequently, this has been identified as an area with great research potential.

Dietary supplements for body-weight reduction: a systematic review.

PubMed

Pittler, Max H; Ernst, Edzard

2004-04-01

Compliance with conventional weight-management programs is notoriously poor, and a plethora of over-the-counter slimming aids are sold with claims of effectiveness. The objective of the study was to assess the evidence from rigorous clinical trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses on the effectiveness of dietary supplements in reducing body weight. The study was a systematic review. Literature searches were conducted on Medline, Embase, Amed, Cinahl, and the Cochrane Library until March 2003. Hand searches of medical journals, the authors' own files, and bibliographies of identified articles were conducted. There were no restrictions regarding the language of publication. The screening of studies, selection, validation, data extraction, and the assessment of methodologic quality were performed independently by the 2 reviewers. To be included, trials were required to be randomized and double-blind. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of dietary supplements were included if they were based on the results of randomized, double-blind trials. Five systematic reviews and meta-analyses and 25 additional trials were included and reviewed. Data on the following dietary supplements were identified: chitosan, chromium picolinate, Ephedra sinica, Garcinia cambogia, glucomannan, guar gum, hydroxy-methylbutyrate, plantago psyllium, pyruvate, yerba maté, and yohimbe. The reviewed studies provide some encouraging data but no evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that any specific dietary supplement is effective for reducing body weight. The only exceptions are E. sinica- and ephedrine-containing supplements, which have been associated with an increased risk of adverse events. The evidence for most dietary supplements as aids in reducing body weight is not convincing. None of the reviewed dietary supplements can be recommended for over-the-counter use.

Mind the Gap. A systematic review to identify usability and safety challenges and practices during electronic health record implementation.

PubMed

Ratwani, Raj; Fairbanks, Terry; Savage, Erica; Adams, Katie; Wittie, Michael; Boone, Edna; Hayden, Andrew; Barnes, Janey; Hettinger, Zach; Gettinger, Andrew

2016-11-16

Decisions made during electronic health record (EHR) implementations profoundly affect usability and safety. This study aims to identify gaps between the current literature and key stakeholders' perceptions of usability and safety practices and the challenges encountered during the implementation of EHRs. Two approaches were used: a literature review and interviews with key stakeholders. We performed a systematic review of the literature to identify usability and safety challenges and best practices during implementation. A total of 55 articles were reviewed through searches of PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus. We used a qualitative approach to identify key stakeholders' perceptions; semi-structured interviews were conducted with a diverse set of health IT stakeholders to understand their current practices and challenges related to usability during implementation. We used a grounded theory approach: data were coded, sorted, and emerging themes were identified. Conclusions from both sources of data were compared to identify areas of misalignment. We identified six emerging themes from the literature and stakeholder interviews: cost and resources, risk assessment, governance and consensus building, customization, clinical workflow and usability testing, and training. Across these themes, there were misalignments between the literature and stakeholder perspectives, indicating major gaps. Major gaps identified from each of six emerging themes are discussed as critical areas for future research, opportunities for new stakeholder initiatives, and opportunities to better disseminate resources to improve the implementation of EHRs. Our analysis identified practices and challenges across six different emerging themes, illustrated important gaps, and results suggest critical areas for future research and dissemination to improve EHR implementation.

A Systematic Review of Validated Methods for Identifying Cerebrovascular Accident or Transient Ischemic Attack Using Administrative Data

PubMed Central

Andrade, Susan E.; Harrold, Leslie R.; Tjia, Jennifer; Cutrona, Sarah L.; Saczynski, Jane S.; Dodd, Katherine S.; Goldberg, Robert J.; Gurwitz, Jerry H.

2012-01-01

Purpose To perform a systematic review of the validity of algorithms for identifying cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) or transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) using administrative and claims data. Methods PubMed and Iowa Drug Information Service (IDIS) searches of the English language literature were performed to identify studies published between 1990 and 2010 that evaluated the validity of algorithms for identifying CVAs (ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes, intracranial hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage) and/or TIAs in administrative data. Two study investigators independently reviewed the abstracts and articles to determine relevant studies according to pre-specified criteria. Results A total of 35 articles met the criteria for evaluation. Of these, 26 articles provided data to evaluate the validity of stroke, 7 reported the validity of TIA, 5 reported the validity of intracranial bleeds (intracerebral hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage), and 10 studies reported the validity of algorithms to identify the composite endpoints of stroke/TIA or cerebrovascular disease. Positive predictive values (PPVs) varied depending on the specific outcomes and algorithms evaluated. Specific algorithms to evaluate the presence of stroke and intracranial bleeds were found to have high PPVs (80% or greater). Algorithms to evaluate TIAs in adult populations were generally found to have PPVs of 70% or greater. Conclusions The algorithms and definitions to identify CVAs and TIAs using administrative and claims data differ greatly in the published literature. The choice of the algorithm employed should be determined by the stroke subtype of interest. PMID:22262598

Citation searching: a systematic review case study of multiple risk behaviour interventions

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background The value of citation searches as part of the systematic review process is currently unknown. While the major guides to conducting systematic reviews state that citation searching should be carried out in addition to searching bibliographic databases there are still few studies in the literature that support this view. Rather than using a predefined search strategy to retrieve studies, citation searching uses known relevant papers to identify further papers. Methods We describe a case study about the effectiveness of using the citation sources Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science and OVIDSP MEDLINE to identify records for inclusion in a systematic review. We used the 40 included studies identified by traditional database searches from one systematic review of interventions for multiple risk behaviours. We searched for each of the included studies in the four citation sources to retrieve the details of all papers that have cited these studies. We carried out two analyses; the first was to examine the overlap between the four citation sources to identify which citation tool was the most useful; the second was to investigate whether the citation searches identified any relevant records in addition to those retrieved by the original database searches. Results The highest number of citations was retrieved from Google Scholar (1680), followed by Scopus (1173), then Web of Science (1095) and lastly OVIDSP (213). To retrieve all the records identified by the citation tracking searching all four resources was required. Google Scholar identified the highest number of unique citations. The citation tracking identified 9 studies that met the review’s inclusion criteria. Eight of these had already been identified by the traditional databases searches and identified in the screening process while the ninth was not available in any of the databases when the original searches were carried out. It would, however, have been identified by two of the database search

Cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening and treatment methods: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Azar, Farbod Ebadifard; Azami-Aghdash, Saber; Pournaghi-Azar, Fatemeh; Mazdaki, Alireza; Rezapour, Aziz; Ebrahimi, Parvin; Yousefzadeh, Negar

2017-06-19

Due to extensive literature in the field of lung cancer and their heterogeneous results, the aim of this study was to systematically review of systematic reviews studies which reviewed the cost-effectiveness of various lung cancer screening and treatment methods. In this systematic review of systematic reviews study, required data were collected searching the following key words which selected from Mesh: "lung cancer", "lung oncology", "lung Carcinoma", "lung neoplasm", "lung tumors", "cost- effectiveness", "systematic review" and "Meta-analysis". The following databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane Library electronic databases, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Two reviewers (RA and A-AS) evaluated the articles according to the checklist of "assessment of multiple systematic reviews" (AMSTAR) tool. Overall, information of 110 papers was discussed in eight systematic reviews. Authors focused on cost-effectiveness of lung cancer treatments in five systematic reviews. Targeted therapy options (bevacizumab, Erlotinib and Crizotinib) show an acceptable cost-effectiveness. Results of three studies failed to show cost-effectiveness of screening methods. None of the studies had used the meta-analysis method. The Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) tool and Drummond checklist were mostly used in assessing the quality of articles. Most perspective was related to the Payer (64 times) and the lowest was related to Social (11times). Most cases referred to Incremental analysis (82%) and also the lowest point of referral was related to Discounting (in 49% of the cases). The average quality score of included studies was calculated 9.2% from 11. Targeted therapy can be an option for the treatment of lung cancer. Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of computerized tomographic colonography (CTC) in lung cancer screening is recommended. The perspective of the community should be more taken into consideration in studies of cost-effectiveness. Paying more attention to the topic of

Perinatal health outcomes and care among asylum seekers and refugees: a systematic review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Heslehurst, Nicola; Brown, Heather; Pemu, Augustina; Coleman, Hayley; Rankin, Judith

2018-06-12

Global migration is at an all-time high with implications for perinatal health. Migrant women, especially asylum seekers and refugees, represent a particularly vulnerable group. Understanding the impact on the perinatal health of women and offspring is an important prerequisite to improving care and outcomes. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the current evidence base on perinatal health outcomes and care among women with asylum seeker or refugee status. Twelve electronic database, reference list and citation searches (1 January 2007-July 2017) were carried out between June and July 2017. Quantitative and qualitative systematic reviews, published in the English language, were included if they reported perinatal health outcomes or care and clearly stated that they included asylum seekers or refugees. Screening for eligibility, data extraction, quality appraisal and evidence synthesis were carried out in duplicate. The results were summarised narratively. Among 3415 records screened, 29 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. Only one exclusively focussed on asylum seekers; the remaining reviews grouped asylum seekers and refugees with wider migrant populations. Perinatal outcomes were predominantly worse among migrant women, particularly mental health, maternal mortality, preterm birth and congenital anomalies. Access and use of care was obstructed by structural, organisational, social, personal and cultural barriers. Migrant women's experiences of care included negative communication, discrimination, poor relationships with health professionals, cultural clashes and negative experiences of clinical intervention. Additional data for asylum seekers and refugees demonstrated complex obstetric issues, sexual assault, offspring mortality, unwanted pregnancy, poverty, social isolation and experiences of racism, prejudice and stereotyping within perinatal healthcare. This review identified adverse pregnancy outcomes among asylum seeker and refugee

An exploration of crowdsourcing citation screening for systematic reviews

PubMed Central

Mortensen, Michael L.; Adam, Gaelen P.; Trikalinos, Thomas A.; Kraska, Tim

2017-01-01

Systematic reviews are increasingly used to inform health care decisions, but are expensive to produce. We explore the use of crowdsourcing (distributing tasks to untrained workers via the web) to reduce the cost of screening citations. We used Amazon Mechanical Turk as our platform and 4 previously conducted systematic reviews as examples. For each citation, workers answered 4 or 5 questions that were equivalent to the eligibility criteria. We aggregated responses from multiple workers into an overall decision to include or exclude the citation using 1 of 9 algorithms and compared the performance of these algorithms to the corresponding decisions of trained experts. The most inclusive algorithm (designating a citation as relevant if any worker did) identified 95% to 99% of the citations that were ultimately included in the reviews while excluding 68% to 82% of irrelevant citations. Other algorithms increased the fraction of irrelevant articles excluded at some cost to the inclusion of relevant studies. Crowdworkers completed screening in 4 to 17 days, costing $460 to $2220, a cost reduction of up to 88% compared to trained experts. Crowdsourcing may represent a useful approach to reducing the cost of identifying literature for systematic reviews. PMID:28677322

Consideration of health inequalities in systematic reviews: a mapping review of guidance.

PubMed

Maden, Michelle

2016-11-28

Given that we know that interventions shown to be effective in improving the health of a population may actually widen the health inequalities gap while others reduce it, it is imperative that all systematic reviewers consider how the findings of their reviews may impact (reduce or increase) on the health inequality gap. This study reviewed existing guidance on incorporating considerations of health inequalities in systematic reviews in order to examine the extent to which they can help reviewers to incorporate such issues. A mapping review was undertaken to identify guidance documents that purported to inform reviewers on whether and how to incorporate considerations of health inequalities. Searches were undertaken in Medline, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library Methodology Register. Review guidance manuals prepared by international organisations engaged in undertaking systematic reviews, and their associated websites were scanned. Studies were included if they provided an overview or discussed the development and testing of guidance for dealing with the incorporation of considerations of health inequalities in evidence synthesis. Results are summarised in narrative and tabular forms. Twenty guidance documents published between 2009 and 2016 were included. Guidance has been produced to inform considerations of health inequalities at different stages of the systematic review process. The Campbell and Cochrane Equity Group have been instrumental in developing and promoting such guidance. Definitions of health inequalities and guidance differed across the included studies. All but one guidance document were transparent in their method of production. Formal methods of evaluation were reported for six guidance documents. Most of the guidance was operationalised in the form of examples taken from published systematic reviews. The number of guidance items to operationalise ranges from 3 up to 26 with a considerable overlap noted. Adhering to the guidance will require more

The psychometric properties and practicability of self-report instruments to identify medication nonadherence in adult transplant patients: a systematic review.

PubMed

Dobbels, Fabienne; Berben, Lut; De Geest, Sabina; Drent, Gerda; Lennerling, Annette; Whittaker, Clare; Kugler, Christiane

2010-07-27

Nonadherence to immunosuppressive therapy is recognized as a key prognostic indicator for poor posttransplantation long-term outcomes. Several methods aiming to measure medication nonadherence have been suggested in the literature. Although combining measurement methods is regarded as the gold standard for measuring nonadherence, self-report is generally considered a central component of adherence assessment. However, no systematic review currently exists to determine which instrument(s) are most appropriate for use in transplant populations. The transplant360 Task Force first performed a survey of the self-report adherence instruments currently used in European centers. Next, a systematic literature review of self-report instruments assessing medication adherence in chronically ill patients was conducted. Self-report instruments were evaluated to assess those which were: (a) short and easy to score; (b) assessed both the taking and timing of medication intake; and (c) had established reliability and validity. Fourteen instruments were identified from our survey of European centers, of which the Basel Assessment of Adherence Scale for Immunosuppressives met the aforementioned criteria. The systematic review found 20 self-report instruments, of which only two qualified for use in transplantation, that is, the Brief Antiretroviral Adherence Index and the Medication Adherence Self-Report Inventory. The three selected self-report scales may assist transplant professionals in detecting nonadherence. However, these scales were only validated in patients with HIV. Although HIV shares similar characteristics with transplantation, including the importance of taking and timing of medication, further validation in transplant populations is required.

Telerheumatology: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

McDougall, John A; Ferucci, Elizabeth D; Glover, Janis; Fraenkel, Liana

2017-10-01

To identify and summarize the published and gray literature on the use of telemedicine for the diagnosis and management of inflammatory and/or autoimmune rheumatic disease. We performed a registered systematic search (CRD42015025382) for studies using MEDLINE (1946 to July 2015), Embase (1974 to July 2015), Web of Science (1900 to July 2015), and Scopus (1946 to July 2015) databases. We included studies that demonstrated the use of telemedicine for diagnosis and/or management of inflammatory/autoimmune rheumatic disease. Following data extraction, we performed a descriptive analysis. Our literature search identified 1,468 potentially eligible studies. Of these studies, 20 were ultimately included in this review. Studies varied significantly in publication type, quality of evidence, and the reporting of methods. Most demonstrated a high risk of bias. Rheumatoid arthritis was the most commonly studied rheumatic disease (42% of patients). Studies demonstrated conflicting results regarding the effectiveness of telemedicine (18 found it effective, 1 found it effective but possibly harmful, and 1 found it ineffective). A limited number of studies included some component of a cost analysis (n = 6; 16% of patients); all of these found telemedicine to be cost-effective. Studies identified by this systematic review generally found telemedicine to be effective for the diagnosis and management of autoimmune/inflammatory rheumatic disease; however, there is limited evidence to support this conclusion. Further studies are needed to determine the best uses of telemedicine for the diagnosis and management of these conditions. © 2016, American College of Rheumatology.

An overview of systematic reviews on the public health consequences of social isolation and loneliness.

PubMed

Leigh-Hunt, N; Bagguley, D; Bash, K; Turner, V; Turnbull, S; Valtorta, N; Caan, W

2017-11-01

Social isolation and loneliness have been associated with ill health and are common in the developed world. A clear understanding of their implications for morbidity and mortality is needed to gauge the extent of the associated public health challenge and the potential benefit of intervention. A systematic review of systematic reviews (systematic overview) was undertaken to determine the wider consequences of social isolation and loneliness, identify any differences between the two, determine differences from findings of non-systematic reviews and to clarify the direction of causality. Eight databases were searched from 1950 to 2016 for English language reviews covering social isolation and loneliness but not solely social support. Suitability for inclusion was determined by two or more reviewers, the methodological quality of included systematic reviews assessed using the a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) checklist and the quality of evidence within these reviews using the grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluations (GRADE) approach. Non-systematic reviews were sought for a comparison of findings but not included in the primary narrative synthesis. Forty systematic reviews of mainly observational studies were identified, largely from the developed world. Meta-analyses have identified a significant association between social isolation and loneliness with increased all-cause mortality and social isolation with cardiovascular disease. Narrative systematic reviews suggest associations with poorer mental health outcomes, with less strong evidence for behavioural and other physical health outcomes. No reviews were identified for wider socio-economic or developmental outcomes. This systematic overview highlights that there is consistent evidence linking social isolation and loneliness to worse cardiovascular and mental health outcomes. The role of social isolation and loneliness in other conditions and their socio

Inuit Elderly: A Systematic Review of Peer Reviewed Journal Articles.

PubMed

Somogyi, Balvinder K; Barker, Melanie; MacLean, Calvin; Grischkan, Pamela

2015-01-01

Over the last century, Inuit have experienced rapid social changes that have greatly impacted their way of life, health, and intergenerational traditions. Although there is a growing body of research concerning Inuit youth, relatively little is known about elderly Inuit. In an effort to bridge this knowledge gap, a systematic review of peer-reviewed journal articles was conducted. This review identified a dearth of research on older Inuit, and highlighted limitations in service provision to this primarily rural and isolated population. Implications for policy and practice and recommendations for future research are also discussed.

What do we know about preventing school violence? A systematic review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Lester, Soraya; Lawrence, Cayleigh; Ward, Catherine L

2017-03-01

Many children across the world are exposed to school violence, which undermines their right to education and adversely affects their development. Studies of interventions for school violence suggest that it can be prevented. However, this evidence base is challenging to navigate. We completed a systematic review of interventions to reduce four types of school violence: (a) peer violence; (b) corporal punishment; (c) student-on-teacher violence and (d) teacher-on-student violence. Reviewers independently searched databases and journals. Included studies were published between 2005 and 2015; in English; considered school-based interventions for children and measured violence as an outcome. Many systematic reviews were found, thus we completed a systematic review of systematic reviews. Only systematic reviews on interventions for intimate partner violence (IPV) and peer aggression were found. These reviews were generally of moderate quality. Research on both types of violence was largely completed in North America. Only a handful of programmes demonstrate promise in preventing IPV. Cognitive behavioral, social-emotional and peer mentoring/mediation programmes showed promise in reducing the levels of perpetration of peer aggression. Further research needs to determine the long-term effects of interventions, potential moderators and mediators of program effects, program effects across different contexts and key intervention components.

A Systematic Review of Exercise Systematic Reviews in the Cancer Literature (2005-2017).

PubMed

Stout, Nicole L; Baima, Jennifer; Swisher, Anne K; Winters-Stone, Kerri M; Welsh, Judith

2017-09-01

Evidence supports the benefits of exercise for patients with cancer; however, specific guidance for clinical decision making regarding exercise timing, frequency, duration, and intensity is lacking. Efforts are needed to optimize clinical recommendations for exercise in the cancer population. To aggregate information regarding the benefit of exercise through a systematic review of existing systematic reviews in the cancer exercise literature. PubMed, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the impact of movement-based exercise on the adult cancer population. Two author teams reviewed 302 abstracts for inclusion with 93 selected for full-text review. A total of 53 studies were analyzed. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) was used as a quality measure of the reviews. Information was extracted using the PICO format (ie, participants, intervention, comparison, outcomes). Descriptive findings are reported. Mean AMSTAR score = 7.66/11 (±2.04) suggests moderate quality of the systematic reviews. Exercise is beneficial before, during, and after cancer treatment, across all cancer types, and for a variety of cancer-related impairments. Moderate-to-vigorous exercise is the best level of exercise intensity to improve physical function and mitigate cancer-related impairments. Therapeutic exercises are beneficial to manage treatment side effects, may enhance tolerance to cancer treatments, and improve functional outcomes. Supervised exercise yielded superior benefits versus unsupervised. Serious adverse events were not common. Movement-based exercise intervention outcomes are reported. No analysis of pooled effects was calculated across reviews due to significant heterogeneity within the systematic reviews. Findings do not consider exercise in advanced cancers or pediatric populations. Exercise promotes significant improvements in clinical, functional, and in some populations, survival outcomes and can be

Definitions, Foundations and Associations of Physical Literacy: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Edwards, Lowri C; Bryant, Anna S; Keegan, Richard J; Morgan, Kevin; Jones, Anwen M

2017-01-01

The concept of physical literacy has stimulated increased research attention in recent years-being deployed in physical education, sport participation, and the promotion of physical activity. Independent research groups currently operationalize the construct differently. The purpose of this systematic review was to conduct a systematic review of the physical literacy construct, as reflected in contemporary research literature. Five databases were searched using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic reviews. Inclusion criteria were English language, peer reviewed, published by March 2016, and seeking to conceptualize physical literacy. Articles that met these criteria were analyzed in relation to three core areas: properties/attributes, philosophical foundations and theoretical associations with other constructs. A total of 50 published articles met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed qualitatively using inductive thematic analysis. The thematic analysis addressed the three core areas. Under definitions, core attributes that define physical literacy were identified, as well as areas of conflict between different approaches currently being adopted. One relatively clear philosophical approach was prominent in approximately half of the papers, based on a monist/holistic ontology and phenomenological epistemology. Finally, the analysis identified a number of theoretical associations, including health, physical activity and academic performance. Current literature contains different representations of the physical literacy construct. The costs and benefits of adopting an exclusive approach versus pluralism are considered. Recommendations for both researchers and practitioners focus on identifying and clearly articulating the definitions, philosophical assumptions and expected outcomes prior to evaluating the effectiveness of this emerging concept.

The effects of community pharmacy public health interventions on population health and health inequalities: a systematic review of reviews protocol.

PubMed

Hillier-Brown, Frances; Bambra, Clare; Thomson, Katie; Balaj, Mirza; Walton, Nick; Todd, Adam

2017-08-30

Community pharmacies have great potential to deliver services aimed at promoting health and preventing disease, and are embedded within communities. In the light of a rapid increase in community pharmacy-delivered public health services and an accompanying increase in the evidence base, this systematic review of reviews will synthesise systematic reviews of public health community pharmacy interventions and assess their effects on public health and health inequalities. Systematic review methodology will be used to identify all systematic reviews that describe the health and health equity effects of community pharmacy public health interventions. Twenty databases will be searched using a pre-determined search strategy to evaluate community pharmacy-delivered public health interventions. Findings from the included reviews will be pooled, and a narrative synthesis executed to identify overarching patterns and results. Findings will support future decision-making around how community pharmacy public health services can be used alongside other strategies to promote health, prevent disease and reduce health inequalities. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42017056264 .

Systematic review A systematic review of metabolite profiling in gestational diabetes mellitus

PubMed Central

Huynh, Jennifer; Xiong, Grace; Bentley-Lewis, Rhonda

2014-01-01

Aims/hypothesis Gestational diabetes mellitus is associated with adverse maternal and fetal outcomes during, as well as subsequent to, pregnancy, including increased risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Because of the importance of early risk stratification in preventing these complications, improved first-trimester biomarker determination for diagnosing gestational diabetes would enhance our ability to optimise both maternal and fetal health. Metabolomic profiling, the systematic study of small molecule products of biochemical pathways, has shown promise in the identification of key metabolites associated with the pathogenesis of several metabolic diseases, including gestational diabetes. This article provides a systematic review of the current state of research on biomarkers and gestational diabetes and discusses the clinical relevance of metabolomics in the prediction, diagnosis and management of gestational diabetes. Methods We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE (PubMed) up to the end of February 2014 using the key term combinations of ‘metabolomics,’ ‘metabonomics,’ ‘nuclear magnetic spectroscopy,’ ‘mass spectrometry,’ ‘metabolic profiling’ and ‘amino acid profile’ combined (AND) with ‘gestational diabetes’. Additional articles were identified through searching the reference lists from included studies. Quality assessment of included articles was conducted through the use of QUADOMICS. Results This systematic review included 17 articles. The biomarkers most consistently associated with gestational diabetes were asymmetric dimethylarginine and NEFAs. After QUADOMICS analysis, 13 of the 17 included studies were classified as ‘high quality’. Conclusions/interpretation Existing metabolomic studies of gestational diabetes present inconsistent findings regarding metabolite profile characteristics. Further studies are needed in larger, more racially/ethnically diverse populations. PMID:25193282

Nature and reporting characteristics of UK health technology assessment systematic reviews.

PubMed

Carroll, Christopher; Kaltenthaler, Eva

2018-05-08

A recent study by Page et al. (PLoS Med. 2016;13(5):e1002028) claimed that increasing numbers of reviews are being published and many are poorly-conducted and reported. The aim of the present study was to assess how well reporting standards of systematic reviews produced in a Health Technology Assessment (HTA) context compare with reporting in Cochrane and other 'non-Cochrane' systematic reviews from the same years (2004 and 2014), as reported by Page et al. (PLoS Med. 2016;13(5):e1002028). All relevant UK HTA programme systematic reviews published in 2004 and 2014 were identified. After piloting of the form, two reviewers each extracted relevant data on conduct and reporting from these reviews. These data were compared with data for Cochrane and "non-Cochrane" systematic reviews, as published by Page et al. (PLoS Med. 2016;13(5):e1002028). All data were tabulated and summarized. There were 30 UK HTA programme systematic reviews and 300 other systematic reviews, including Cochrane reviews (n = 45). The percentage of HTA reviews with required elements of conduct and reporting was frequently very similar to Cochrane and much higher than all other systematic reviews, e.g. availability of protocols (90, 98 and 16% respectively); the specification of study design criteria (100, 100, 79%); the reporting of outcomes (100, 100, 78%), quality assessment (100, 100, 70%); the searching of trial registries for unpublished data (70, 62, 19%); reporting of reasons for excluding studies (91, 91 and 70%) and reporting of authors' conflicts of interests (100, 100, 87%). HTA reviews only compared less favourably with Cochrane and other reviews in assessments of publication bias. UK HTA systematic reviews are often produced within a specific policy-making context. This context has implications for timelines, tools and resources. However, UK HTA systematic reviews still tend to present standards of conduct and reporting equivalent to "gold standard" Cochrane reviews and superior

Correlates of Physical Activity of Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review of Reviews

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Sterdt, Elena; Liersch, Sebastian; Walter, Ulla

2014-01-01

Objective: The aim of this study was to identify promoting and inhibiting correlates associated with the physical activity (PA) of children and adolescents (aged 3-18). The intention was to demonstrate the complexity of correlates of PA and to determine possible influencing factors. Design: A systematic review of reviews. Methods: Systematic…

Speech Recognition for Medical Dictation: Overview in Quebec and Systematic Review.

PubMed

Poder, Thomas G; Fisette, Jean-François; Déry, Véronique

2018-04-03

Speech recognition is increasingly used in medical reporting. The aim of this article is to identify in the literature the strengths and weaknesses of this technology, as well as barriers to and facilitators of its implementation. A systematic review of systematic reviews was performed using PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and the Center for Reviews and Dissemination through August 2017. The gray literature has also been consulted. The quality of systematic reviews has been assessed with the AMSTAR checklist. The main inclusion criterion was use of speech recognition for medical reporting (front-end or back-end). A survey has also been conducted in Quebec, Canada, to identify the dissemination of this technology in this province, as well as the factors leading to the success or failure of its implementation. Five systematic reviews were identified. These reviews indicated a high level of heterogeneity across studies. The quality of the studies reported was generally poor. Speech recognition is not as accurate as human transcription, but it can dramatically reduce turnaround times for reporting. In front-end use, medical doctors need to spend more time on dictation and correction than required with human transcription. With speech recognition, major errors occur up to three times more frequently. In back-end use, a potential increase in productivity of transcriptionists was noted. In conclusion, speech recognition offers several advantages for medical reporting. However, these advantages are countered by an increased burden on medical doctors and by risks of additional errors in medical reports. It is also hard to identify for which medical specialties and which clinical activities the use of speech recognition will be the most beneficial.

Factors influencing cancer treatment decision-making by indigenous peoples: a systematic review.

PubMed

Tranberg, Rona; Alexander, Susan; Hatcher, Deborah; Mackey, Sandra; Shahid, Shaouli; Holden, Lynda; Kwok, Cannas

2016-02-01

We aim to systematically review studies that identify factors influencing cancer treatment decision-making among indigenous peoples. Following the outline suggested by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis, a rigorous systematic review and meta-synthesis were conducted of factors that influence cancer treatment decision-making by indigenous peoples. A total of 733 articles were retrieved from eight databases and a manual search. After screening the titles and abstracts, the full text of 26 articles were critically appraised, resulting in five articles that met inclusion criteria for the review. Because the five articles to be reviewed were qualitative studies, the Critical Appraisal Skills Program toolkit was used to evaluate the methodological quality. A thematic synthesis was employed to identify common themes across the studies. Multiple socio-economic and cultural factors were identified that all had the potential to influence cancer treatment decision-making by indigenous people. These factors were distilled into four themes: spiritual beliefs, cultural influences, communication and existing healthcare systems and structures. Although existing research identified multiple factors influencing decision-making, this review identified that quality studies in this domain are scarce. There is scope for further investigation, both into decision-making factors and into the subsequent design of culturally appropriate programmes and services that meet the needs of indigenous peoples. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Systematic reviews of diagnostic tests in endocrinology: an audit of methods, reporting, and performance.

PubMed

Spencer-Bonilla, Gabriela; Singh Ospina, Naykky; Rodriguez-Gutierrez, Rene; Brito, Juan P; Iñiguez-Ariza, Nicole; Tamhane, Shrikant; Erwin, Patricia J; Murad, M Hassan; Montori, Victor M

2017-07-01

Systematic reviews provide clinicians and policymakers estimates of diagnostic test accuracy and their usefulness in clinical practice. We identified all available systematic reviews of diagnosis in endocrinology, summarized the diagnostic accuracy of the tests included, and assessed the credibility and clinical usefulness of the methods and reporting. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception to December 2015 for systematic reviews and meta-analyses reporting accuracy measures of diagnostic tests in endocrinology. Experienced reviewers independently screened for eligible studies and collected data. We summarized the results, methods, and reporting of the reviews. We performed subgroup analyses to categorize diagnostic tests as most useful based on their accuracy. We identified 84 systematic reviews; half of the tests included were classified as helpful when positive, one-fourth as helpful when negative. Most authors adequately reported how studies were identified and selected and how their trustworthiness (risk of bias) was judged. Only one in three reviews, however, reported an overall judgment about trustworthiness and one in five reported using adequate meta-analytic methods. One in four reported contacting authors for further information and about half included only patients with diagnostic uncertainty. Up to half of the diagnostic endocrine tests in which the likelihood ratio was calculated or provided are likely to be helpful in practice when positive as are one-quarter when negative. Most diagnostic systematic reviews in endocrine lack methodological rigor, protection against bias, and offer limited credibility. Substantial efforts, therefore, seem necessary to improve the quality of diagnostic systematic reviews in endocrinology.

Culling a clinical terminology: a systematic approach to identifying problematic content.

PubMed Central

Sable, J. H.; Nash, S. K.; Wang, A. Y.

2001-01-01

The College of American Pathologists and the National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom are merging their respective clinical terminologies, SNOMED RT and Clinical Terms Version 3, into a new terminology, SNOMED CT. This requires mapping concept descriptions between the two existing terminologies. During the mapping process, many descriptions were identified as being potentially problematic. They require further review by the SNOMED editorial process before either (1) being incorporated into SNOMED CT, or (2) retired from active use. This article presents data on the concept descriptions that were identified as needing further review during the early phases of SNOMED CT development. Based on this work, we describe fourteen types of problematic terminology content. Identifying problematic terminology content can be approached in a systematic manner. PMID:11825253

The methodological quality of systematic reviews of animal studies in dentistry.

PubMed

Faggion, C M; Listl, S; Giannakopoulos, N N

2012-05-01

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies are important for improving estimates of the effects of treatment and for guiding future clinical studies on humans. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies in dentistry through using a validated checklist. A literature search was conducted independently and in duplicate in the PubMed and LILACS databases. References in selected systematic reviews were assessed to identify other studies not captured by the electronic searches. The methodological quality of studies was assessed independently and in duplicate by using the AMSTAR checklist; the quality was scored as low, moderate, or high. The reviewers were calibrated before the assessment and agreement between them was assessed using Cohen's Kappa statistic. Of 444 studies retrieved, 54 systematic reviews were selected after full-text assessment. Agreement between the reviewers was regarded as excellent. Only two studies were scored as high quality; 17 and 35 studies were scored as medium and low quality, respectively. There is room for improvement of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of animal studies in dentistry. Checklists, such as AMSTAR, can guide researchers in planning and executing systematic reviews and meta-analyses. For determining the need for additional investigations in animals and in order to provide good data for potential application in human, such reviews should be based on animal experiments performed according to sound methodological principles. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Identifying and prioritising systematic review topics with public health stakeholders: A protocol for a modified Delphi study in Switzerland to inform future research agendas.

PubMed

Hoekstra, Dyon; Mütsch, Margot; Kien, Christina; Gerhardus, Ansgar; Lhachimi, Stefan K

2017-08-04

The Cochrane Collaboration aims to produce relevant and top priority evidence that responds to existing evidence gaps. Hence, research priority setting (RPS) is important to identify which potential research gaps are deemed most important. Moreover, RPS supports future health research to conform both health and health evidence needs. However, studies that are prioritising systematic review topics in public health are surprisingly rare. Therefore, to inform the research agenda of Cochrane Public Health Europe (CPHE), we introduce the protocol of a priority setting study on systematic review topics in several European countries, which is conceptualised as pilot. We will conduct a two-round modified Delphi study in Switzerland, incorporating an anonymous web-based questionnaire, to assess which topics should be prioritised for systematic reviews in public health. In the first Delphi round public health stakeholders will suggest relevant assessment criteria and potential priority topics. In the second Delphi round the participants indicate their (dis)agreement to the aggregated results of the first round and rate the potential review topics with the predetermined criteria on a four-point Likert scale. As we invite a wide variety of stakeholders we will compare the results between the different stakeholder groups. We have received ethical approval from the ethical board of the University of Bremen, Germany (principal investigation is conducted at the University of Bremen) and a certificate of non-objection from the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland (fieldwork will be conducted in Switzerland). The results of this study will be further disseminated through peer reviewed publication and will support systematic review author groups (i.a. CPHE) to improve the relevance of the groups´ future review work. Finally, the proposed priority setting study can be used as a framework by other systematic review groups when conducting a priority setting study in a different context. �

Healthcare Applications of Smart Watches. A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Lu, Tsung-Chien; Fu, Chia-Ming; Ma, Matthew Huei-Ming; Fang, Cheng-Chung; Turner, Anne M

2016-09-14

The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize research studies involving the use of smart watch devices for healthcare. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was chosen as the systematic review methodology. We searched PubMed, CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, ACM, and IEEE Xplore. In order to include ongoing clinical trials, we also searched ClinicalTrials.gov. Two investigators evaluated the retrieved articles for inclusion. Discrepancies between investigators regarding article inclusion and extracted data were resolved through team discussion. 356 articles were screened and 24 were selected for review. The most common publication venue was in conference proceedings (13, 54%). The majority of studies were published or presented in 2015 (19, 79%). We identified two registered clinical trials underway. A large proportion of the identified studies focused on applications involving health monitoring for the elderly (6, 25%). Five studies focused on patients with Parkinson's disease and one on cardiac arrest. There were no studies which reported use of usability testing before implementation. Most of the reviewed studies focused on the chronically ill elderly. There was a lack of detailed description of user-centered design or usability testing before implementation. Based on our review, the most commonly used platform in healthcare research was that of the Android Wear. The clinical application of smart watches as assistive devices deserves further attention. Smart watches are unobtrusive and easy to wear. While smart watch technology supplied with biosensors has potential to be useful in a variety of healthcare applications, rigorous research with their use in clinical settings is needed.

Vibration response imaging: protocol for a systematic review.

PubMed

Berry, Marc P; Camporota, Luigi; Ntoumenopoulos, George

2013-09-25

The concept of lung sounds conveying information regarding lung physiology has been used extensively in clinical practice, particularly with physical auscultation using a stethoscope. Advances in computer technology have facilitated the construction of dynamic visual images derived from recorded lung sounds. Arguably, the most significant progress in this field was the development of the commercially available vibration response imaging (VRI) (Deep Breeze Ltd, Or-Akiva, Israel). This device provides a non-invasive, dynamic image of both lungs constructed from sounds detected from the lungs using surface sensors. In the literature, VRI has been utilized in a multitude of clinical and research settings. This systematic review aims to address three study questions relating to whether VRI can be used as an evaluative device, whether the images generated can be characterized, and which tools and measures have been used to assess these images. This systematic review will involve implementing search strategies in five online journal databases in order to extract articles relating to the application of VRI. Appropriate articles will be identified against a set of pre-determined eligibility criteria and assessed for methodological quality using a standardized scale. Included articles will have data extracted by the reviewers using a standardized evidence table. A narrative synthesis based on a standardized framework will be conducted, clustering evidence into three main groups; one for each of the study questions. A meta-analysis will be conducted if two or more research articles meet pre-determined criteria that allow quantitative synthesis to take place. This systematic review aims to provide a complete overview of the scope of VRI in the clinical and research settings, as well as to discuss methods to interpret the data obtained from VRI. The systematic review intends to help clinicians to make informed decisions on the clinical applicability of the device, to allow

Educational interventions for general practitioners to identify and manage depression as a suicide risk factor in young people: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

PubMed

Tait, Lynda; Michail, Maria

2014-12-15

Suicide is a major public health problem and globally is the second leading cause of death in young adults. Globally, there are 164,000 suicides per year in young people under 25 years. Depression is a strong risk factor for suicide. Evidence shows that 45% of those completing suicide, including young adults, contact their general practitioner rather than a mental health professional in the month before their death. Further evidence indicates that risk factors or early warning signs of suicide in young people go undetected and untreated by general practitioners. Healthcare-based suicide prevention interventions targeted at general practitioners are designed to increase identification of at-risk young people. The rationale of this type of intervention is that early identification and improved clinical management of at-risk individuals will reduce morbidity and mortality. This systematic review will synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of education interventions for general practitioners in identifying and managing depression as a suicide risk factor in young people. We shall conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines and conform to the reporting guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement recommendations. Electronic databases will be systematically searched for randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies investigating the effectiveness of interventions for general practitioners in identifying and managing depression as a suicide risk factor in young people in comparison to any other intervention, no intervention, usual care or waiting list. Grey literature will be searched by screening trial registers. Only studies published in English will be included. No date restrictions will be applied. Two authors will independently screen titles and abstracts of potential studies. The primary outcome is

Lean and Six Sigma in acute care: a systematic review of reviews.

PubMed

Deblois, Simon; Lepanto, Luigi

2016-01-01

The purpose of this paper is to present a systematic review of literature reviews, summarizing how Lean and Six Sigma management techniques have been implemented in acute care settings to date, and assessing their impact. To aid decision makers who wish to use these techniques by identifying the sectors of activity most often targeted, the main results of the interventions, as well as barriers and facilitators involved. To identify areas of future research. A literature search was conducted, using eight databases. The methodological quality of the selected reviews was appraised with AMSTAR. A narrative synthesis was performed according to the guidelines proposed by Popay et al. (2006). Data were reported according to PRISMA. The literature search identified 149 publications published from 1999 to January 2015. Seven literature reviews were included into the systematic review, upon appraisal. The overall quality of the evidence was poor to fair. The clinical settings most described were specialized health care services, including operating suites, intensive care units and emergency departments. The outcomes most often appraised related to processes and quality. The evidence suggests that Lean and Six Sigma are better adapted to settings where processes involve a linear sequence of events. There is a need for more studies of high methodological quality to better understand the effects of these approaches as well as the factors of success and barriers to their implementation. Field studies comparing the effects of Lean and Six Sigma to those of other process redesign or quality improvement efforts would bring a significant contribution to the body of knowledge. Lean and Six Sigma can be considered valuable process optimization approaches in acute health care settings. The success of their implementation requires significant participation of clinical personnel from the frontline as well as clinical leaders and managers. More research is needed to better understand the

The systematic review as a research process in music therapy.

PubMed

Hanson-Abromeit, Deanna; Sena Moore, Kimberly

2014-01-01

Music therapists are challenged to present evidence on the efficacy of music therapy treatment and incorporate the best available research evidence to make informed healthcare and treatment decisions. Higher standards of evidence can come from a variety of sources including systematic reviews. To define and describe a range of research review methods using examples from music therapy and related literature, with emphasis on the systematic review. In addition, the authors provide a detailed overview of methodological processes for conducting and reporting systematic reviews in music therapy. The systematic review process is described in five steps. Step 1 identifies the research plan and operationalized research question(s). Step 2 illustrates the identification and organization of the existing literature related to the question(s). Step 3 details coding of data extracted from the literature. Step 4 explains the synthesis of coded findings and analysis to answer the research question(s). Step 5 describes the strength of evidence evaluation and results presentation for practice recommendations. Music therapists are encouraged to develop and conduct systematic reviews. This methodology contributes to review outcome credibility and can determine how information is interpreted and used by clinicians, clients or patients, and policy makers. A systematic review is a methodologically rigorous research method used to organize and evaluate extant literature related to a clinical problem. Systematic reviews can assist music therapists in managing the ever-increasing literature, making well-informed evidence based practice and research decisions, and translating existing music-based and nonmusic based literature to clinical practice and research development. © the American Music Therapy Association 2014. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Flooding and mental health: a systematic mapping review.

PubMed

Fernandez, Ana; Black, John; Jones, Mairwen; Wilson, Leigh; Salvador-Carulla, Luis; Astell-Burt, Thomas; Black, Deborah

2015-01-01

Floods are the most common type of global natural disaster. Floods have a negative impact on mental health. Comprehensive evaluation and review of the literature are lacking. To systematically map and review available scientific evidence on mental health impacts of floods caused by extended periods of heavy rain in river catchments. We performed a systematic mapping review of published scientific literature in five languages for mixed studies on floods and mental health. PUBMED and Web of Science were searched to identify all relevant articles from 1994 to May 2014 (no restrictions). The electronic search strategy identified 1331 potentially relevant papers. Finally, 83 papers met the inclusion criteria. Four broad areas are identified: i) the main mental health disorders-post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety; ii] the factors associated with mental health among those affected by floods; iii) the narratives associated with flooding, which focuses on the long-term impacts of flooding on mental health as a consequence of the secondary stressors; and iv) the management actions identified. The quantitative and qualitative studies have consistent findings. However, very few studies have used mixed methods to quantify the size of the mental health burden as well as exploration of in-depth narratives. Methodological limitations include control of potential confounders and short-term follow up. Floods following extreme events were excluded from our review. Although the level of exposure to floods has been systematically associated with mental health problems, the paucity of longitudinal studies and lack of confounding controls precludes strong conclusions. We recommend that future research in this area include mixed-method studies that are purposefully designed, using more rigorous methods. Studies should also focus on vulnerable groups and include analyses of policy and practical responses.

Flooding and Mental Health: A Systematic Mapping Review

PubMed Central

Fernandez, Ana; Black, John; Jones, Mairwen; Wilson, Leigh; Salvador-Carulla, Luis; Astell-Burt, Thomas; Black, Deborah

2015-01-01

Background Floods are the most common type of global natural disaster. Floods have a negative impact on mental health. Comprehensive evaluation and review of the literature are lacking. Objective To systematically map and review available scientific evidence on mental health impacts of floods caused by extended periods of heavy rain in river catchments. Methods We performed a systematic mapping review of published scientific literature in five languages for mixed studies on floods and mental health. PUBMED and Web of Science were searched to identify all relevant articles from 1994 to May 2014 (no restrictions). Results The electronic search strategy identified 1331 potentially relevant papers. Finally, 83 papers met the inclusion criteria. Four broad areas are identified: i) the main mental health disorders—post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety; ii] the factors associated with mental health among those affected by floods; iii) the narratives associated with flooding, which focuses on the long-term impacts of flooding on mental health as a consequence of the secondary stressors; and iv) the management actions identified. The quantitative and qualitative studies have consistent findings. However, very few studies have used mixed methods to quantify the size of the mental health burden as well as exploration of in-depth narratives. Methodological limitations include control of potential confounders and short-term follow up. Limitations Floods following extreme events were excluded from our review. Conclusions Although the level of exposure to floods has been systematically associated with mental health problems, the paucity of longitudinal studies and lack of confounding controls precludes strong conclusions. Implications We recommend that future research in this area include mixed-method studies that are purposefully designed, using more rigorous methods. Studies should also focus on vulnerable groups and include analyses of policy and practical

Searching for qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: a structured methodological review.

PubMed

Booth, Andrew

2016-05-04

Qualitative systematic reviews or qualitative evidence syntheses (QES) are increasingly recognised as a way to enhance the value of systematic reviews (SRs) of clinical trials. They can explain the mechanisms by which interventions, evaluated within trials, might achieve their effect. They can investigate differences in effects between different population groups. They can identify which outcomes are most important to patients, carers, health professionals and other stakeholders. QES can explore the impact of acceptance, feasibility, meaningfulness and implementation-related factors within a real world setting and thus contribute to the design and further refinement of future interventions. To produce valid, reliable and meaningful QES requires systematic identification of relevant qualitative evidence. Although the methodologies of QES, including methods for information retrieval, are well-documented, little empirical evidence exists to inform their conduct and reporting. This structured methodological overview examines papers on searching for qualitative research identified from the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group Methodology Register and from citation searches of 15 key papers. A single reviewer reviewed 1299 references. Papers reporting methodological guidance, use of innovative methodologies or empirical studies of retrieval methods were categorised under eight topical headings: overviews and methodological guidance, sampling, sources, structured questions, search procedures, search strategies and filters, supplementary strategies and standards. This structured overview presents a contemporaneous view of information retrieval for qualitative research and identifies a future research agenda. This review concludes that poor empirical evidence underpins current information practice in information retrieval of qualitative research. A trend towards improved transparency of search methods and further evaluation of key search procedures offers

Discharge interventions for older patients leaving hospital: protocol for a systematic meta-review.

PubMed

O'Connell Francischetto, Elaine; Damery, Sarah; Davies, Sarah; Combes, Gill

2016-03-16

There is an increased need for additional care and support services for the elderly population. It is important to identify what support older people need once they are discharged from hospital and to ensure continuity of care. There is a large evidence base focusing on enhanced discharge services and their impact on patients. The services show some potential benefits, but there are inconsistent findings across reviews. Furthermore, it is unclear what elements of enhanced discharge interventions could be most beneficial to older people. This meta-review aims to identify existing systematic reviews of discharge interventions for older people, identify potentially effective elements of enhanced discharge services for this patient group and identify areas where further work may still be needed. The search will aim to identify English language systematic reviews that have assessed the effectiveness of discharge interventions for older people. The following databases will be searched: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, Social Policy and Practice, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, ASSIA, Social Science Citation Index and the Grey Literature Report. The search strategy will comprise the keywords 'systematic reviews', 'older people' and 'discharge'. Discharge interventions must aim to support older patients before, during and/or after discharge from hospital. Outcomes of interest will include mortality, readmissions, length of hospital stay, patient health status, patient and carer satisfaction and staff views. Abstract, title and full text screening will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Data extracted from reviews will include review characteristics, patient population, review quality score, outcome measures and review findings, and a narrative synthesis will be conducted. This review will identify existing reviews of discharge interventions and appraise how these interventions can impact outcomes in older people such as readmissions, health status, length of

Identifying approaches for assessing methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews: a descriptive study.

PubMed

Pussegoda, Kusala; Turner, Lucy; Garritty, Chantelle; Mayhew, Alain; Skidmore, Becky; Stevens, Adrienne; Boutron, Isabelle; Sarkis-Onofre, Rafael; Bjerre, Lise M; Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn; Altman, Douglas G; Moher, David

2017-06-19

The methodological quality and completeness of reporting of the systematic reviews (SRs) is fundamental to optimal implementation of evidence-based health care and the reduction of research waste. Methods exist to appraise SRs yet little is known about how they are used in SRs or where there are potential gaps in research best-practice guidance materials. The aims of this study are to identify reports assessing the methodological quality (MQ) and/or reporting quality (RQ) of a cohort of SRs and to assess their number, general characteristics, and approaches to 'quality' assessment over time. The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE®, and EMBASE® were searched from January 1990 to October 16, 2014, for reports assessing MQ and/or RQ of SRs. Title, abstract, and full-text screening of all reports were conducted independently by two reviewers. Reports assessing the MQ and/or RQ of a cohort of ten or more SRs of interventions were included. All results are reported as frequencies and percentages of reports. Of 20,765 unique records retrieved, 1189 of them were reviewed for full-text review, of which 76 reports were included. Eight previously published approaches to assessing MQ or reporting guidelines used as proxy to assess RQ were used in 80% (61/76) of identified reports. These included two reporting guidelines (PRISMA and QUOROM) and five quality assessment tools (AMSTAR, R-AMSTAR, OQAQ, Mulrow, Sacks) and GRADE criteria. The remaining 24% (18/76) of reports developed their own criteria. PRISMA, OQAQ, and AMSTAR were the most commonly used published tools to assess MQ or RQ. In conjunction with other approaches, published tools were used in 29% (22/76) of reports, with 36% (8/22) assessing adherence to both PRISMA and AMSTAR criteria and 26% (6/22) using QUOROM and OQAQ. The methods used to assess quality of SRs are diverse, and none has become universally accepted. The most commonly used quality assessment tools are AMSTAR, OQAQ, and PRISMA. As new tools and guidelines are

Economics of Early Warning Scores for identifying clinical deterioration-a systematic review.

PubMed

Murphy, A; Cronin, J; Whelan, R; Drummond, F J; Savage, E; Hegarty, J

2018-02-01

In 2013, a National Early Warning System (EWS) was implemented in Ireland. Whilst evidence exists to support the clinical effectiveness of EWS in the acute health care setting, there is a paucity of information on their cost and cost effectiveness. The objective of this systematic literature review was to critically evaluate the economic literature on the use of EWS in adult patients in acute health care settings for the timely detection of physiological deterioration. A systematic literature review was conducted to accumulate the economic evidence on the use of EWS in adult patients in acute health care settings. The search yielded one health technology assessment, two budget impact analyses and two cost descriptions. Three of the studies were Irish, and considered the national EWS system. A Dutch study reported financial consequences of a single parameter EWS, as part of a rapid response system, in a surgical ward. The fifth study examined an advanced triage system in a medical emergency admission unit in Wales. The economic evidence on the use of EWS amongst adult patients in acute health care settings for the timely detection of physiological deterioration is limited. Further research is required to investigate the cost effectiveness of EWS, and the appropriateness of using standard methods to do so. The recent implementation of a national EWS in Ireland offers a unique opportunity to bridge this gap in the literature to examine the costs and cost effectiveness of a nationally implemented EWS system.

Interventions to promote healthy eating choices when dining out: A systematic review of reviews.

PubMed

Wright, Breanna; Bragge, Peter

2018-05-01

To synthesize review research pertaining to the effectiveness of interventions in dining-out settings to reduce food/calorie consumption. A rapid review methodology was employed to focus on synthesized research. A comprehensive search for peer-reviewed systematic reviews from 2010 to 2015 yielded 1,847 citations. Following screening, ten systematic reviews were included. The 10 included systematic reviews identified 183 primary studies evaluating evidence in three behavioural intervention areas: social models/norms, manipulation of size, and provision of health information. Three systematic reviews evaluating the use of social models/norms found this was an effective intervention for influencing food intake. Five systematic reviews that assessed manipulation of portion/dishware/cutlery size found a small-to-moderate effect on food consumption. Three systematic reviews looked at the provision of health information, which was not effective alone; however, in combination with contextual or interpretive material such as traffic lights or exercise equivalence, this was shown to reduce calorie consumption. One systematic review covered two topic areas. The results indicate that policies or interventions that aim to improve healthy choices or consumption when dining out would benefit from harnessing social norms and positive positioning of social identity. Furthermore, provision of health information should always be accompanied by an interpretative guide, such as traffic lights. Manipulation of plate/portion/cutlery size may be effective; however, the effect size is small and further research is required to investigate whether this effect is retained in overweight or obese populations. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Eating behaviours (food choices, consumption) have played a role in the obesity epidemic. Behavioural 'nudges' have tried to increase healthier eating choices. What does this study add? Social norms and modelling have a

Heart failure symptom relationships: a systematic review.

PubMed

Herr, Janet K; Salyer, Jeanne; Lyon, Debra E; Goodloe, Lauren; Schubert, Christine; Clement, Dolores G

2014-01-01

Heart failure is a prevalent chronic health condition in the United States. Individuals who have heart failure experience as many as 2 to 9 symptoms. The examination of relationships among heart failure symptoms may benefit patients and clinicians who are charged with managing heart failure symptoms. The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize what is known about relationships among heart failure symptoms, a precursor to the identification of heart failure symptom clusters, as well as to examine studies specifically addressing symptom clusters described in this population. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed in the conduct of this systematic review. PubMed, PsychINFO, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Database were searched using the search term heart failure in combination with a pair of symptoms. Of a total of 1316 studies identified from database searches, 34 were included in this systematic review. More than 1 investigator found a moderate level of correlation between depression and fatigue, depression and anxiety, depression and sleep, depression and pain, anxiety and fatigue, and dyspnea and fatigue. The findings of this systematic review provide support for the presence of heart failure symptom clusters. Depression was related to several of the symptoms, providing an indication to clinicians that individuals with heart failure who experience depression may have other concurrent symptoms. Some symptom relationships such as the relationships between fatigue and anxiety or sleep or pain were dependent on the symptom characteristics studied. Symptom prevalence in the sample and restricted sampling may influence the robustness of the symptom relationships. These findings suggest that studies defining the phenotype of individual heart failure symptoms may be a beneficial step in the study of heart failure symptom clusters.

Automatic Evidence Retrieval for Systematic Reviews

PubMed Central

Choong, Miew Keen; Galgani, Filippo; Dunn, Adam G

2014-01-01

Background Snowballing involves recursively pursuing relevant references cited in the retrieved literature and adding them to the search results. Snowballing is an alternative approach to discover additional evidence that was not retrieved through conventional search. Snowballing’s effectiveness makes it best practice in systematic reviews despite being time-consuming and tedious. Objective Our goal was to evaluate an automatic method for citation snowballing’s capacity to identify and retrieve the full text and/or abstracts of cited articles. Methods Using 20 review articles that contained 949 citations to journal or conference articles, we manually searched Microsoft Academic Search (MAS) and identified 78.0% (740/949) of the cited articles that were present in the database. We compared the performance of the automatic citation snowballing method against the results of this manual search, measuring precision, recall, and F1 score. Results The automatic method was able to correctly identify 633 (as proportion of included citations: recall=66.7%, F1 score=79.3%; as proportion of citations in MAS: recall=85.5%, F1 score=91.2%) of citations with high precision (97.7%), and retrieved the full text or abstract for 490 (recall=82.9%, precision=92.1%, F1 score=87.3%) of the 633 correctly retrieved citations. Conclusions The proposed method for automatic citation snowballing is accurate and is capable of obtaining the full texts or abstracts for a substantial proportion of the scholarly citations in review articles. By automating the process of citation snowballing, it may be possible to reduce the time and effort of common evidence surveillance tasks such as keeping trial registries up to date and conducting systematic reviews. PMID:25274020

Automatic evidence retrieval for systematic reviews.

PubMed

Choong, Miew Keen; Galgani, Filippo; Dunn, Adam G; Tsafnat, Guy

2014-10-01

Snowballing involves recursively pursuing relevant references cited in the retrieved literature and adding them to the search results. Snowballing is an alternative approach to discover additional evidence that was not retrieved through conventional search. Snowballing's effectiveness makes it best practice in systematic reviews despite being time-consuming and tedious. Our goal was to evaluate an automatic method for citation snowballing's capacity to identify and retrieve the full text and/or abstracts of cited articles. Using 20 review articles that contained 949 citations to journal or conference articles, we manually searched Microsoft Academic Search (MAS) and identified 78.0% (740/949) of the cited articles that were present in the database. We compared the performance of the automatic citation snowballing method against the results of this manual search, measuring precision, recall, and F1 score. The automatic method was able to correctly identify 633 (as proportion of included citations: recall=66.7%, F1 score=79.3%; as proportion of citations in MAS: recall=85.5%, F1 score=91.2%) of citations with high precision (97.7%), and retrieved the full text or abstract for 490 (recall=82.9%, precision=92.1%, F1 score=87.3%) of the 633 correctly retrieved citations. The proposed method for automatic citation snowballing is accurate and is capable of obtaining the full texts or abstracts for a substantial proportion of the scholarly citations in review articles. By automating the process of citation snowballing, it may be possible to reduce the time and effort of common evidence surveillance tasks such as keeping trial registries up to date and conducting systematic reviews.

Systematic review of factors affecting pharmaceutical expenditures.

PubMed

Mousnad, Mohamed Awad; Shafie, Asrul Akmal; Ibrahim, Mohamed Izham

2014-06-01

To systematically identify the main factors contributing to the increase in pharmaceutical expenditures. A systematic search of published studies was conducted utilising major widely used electronic databases using the search terms 'factors,' 'financing,' 'pharmaceutical,' and 'expenditures.' To be included, the studies needed to: (1) measure at least one of the following outcomes: total growth in pharmaceutical expenditures, price growth or quantity growth; (2) mention a clear method for analysing the impact of factors affecting the increases in drug expenditures; (3) be written in English. Nonprimary articles that were published only as an abstract, a review, a commentary or a letter were excluded. From a total of 2039 studies, only 25 were included in the full review. The main determinant categories that were identified in the review were factors related to price, utilisation, therapeutic choice, demand and health care system. The major cost drivers were found to be changes in drug quantities and therapies as well as new drugs. It is important for policymakers to understand pharmaceutical spending trends and the factors that influence them in order to formulate effective cost containment strategies and design optimum drug policy. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

A Systematic Review of Research on Teaching English Language Skills for Saudi EFL Students

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Alsowat, Hamad H.

2017-01-01

This systematic review study sought to examine the teaching of English language skills in Saudi Arabia by systematically analyzing the previous studies on language skills which were published within the past ten years and identify the research areas to be bridged in the future. The study employed the systematic review approach. The search strategy…

Autism and Equine-Assisted Interventions: A Systematic Mapping Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

McDaniel Peters, B. Caitlin; Wood, Wendy

2017-01-01

This systematic mapping review mapped current knowledge of equine-assisted interventions for people with autism to help guide future practice and research. Thirty-three studies including children and adolescents with autism, 3 of which confirmed diagnoses, were reviewed. Five types of equine-assisted activities were identified across 25 studies,…

A Systematic Review of the Use of LENA Technology

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wang, Ye; Hartman, Maria; Aziz, Nurul Akmar Abdul; Arora, Sonia; Shi, Lingyun; Tunison, Ellie

2017-01-01

The authors systematically reviewed peer-reviewed studies done with LENA (Language ENvironment Analysis) technology, guided by three research questions: (a) What types of studies have been conducted, and with which populations, since the launch of LENA technology?; (b) What challenges related to use of LENA technology were identified?; and (c)…

Do systematic reviews on pediatric topics need special methodological considerations?

PubMed

Farid-Kapadia, Mufiza; Askie, Lisa; Hartling, Lisa; Contopoulos-Ioannidis, Despina; Bhutta, Zulfiqar A; Soll, Roger; Moher, David; Offringa, Martin

2017-03-06

Systematic reviews are key tools to enable decision making by healthcare providers and policymakers. Despite the availability of the evidence based Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA-2009 and PRISMA-P 2015) statements that were developed to improve the transparency and quality of reporting of systematic reviews, uncertainty on how to deal with pediatric-specific methodological challenges of systematic reviews impairs decision-making in child health. In this paper, we identify methodological challenges specific to the design, conduct and reporting of pediatric systematic reviews, and propose a process to address these challenges. One fundamental decision at the outset of a systematic review is whether to focus on a pediatric population only, or to include both adult and pediatric populations. Both from the policy and patient care point of view, the appropriateness of interventions and comparators administered to pre-defined pediatric age subgroup is critical. Decisions need to be based on the biological plausibility of differences in treatment effects across the developmental trajectory in children. Synthesis of evidence from different trials is often impaired by the use of outcomes and measurement instruments that differ between trials and are neither relevant nor validated in the pediatric population. Other issues specific to pediatric systematic reviews include lack of pediatric-sensitive search strategies and inconsistent choices of pediatric age subgroups in meta-analyses. In addition to these methodological issues generic to all pediatric systematic reviews, special considerations are required for reviews of health care interventions' safety and efficacy in neonatology, global health, comparative effectiveness interventions and individual participant data meta-analyses. To date, there is no standard approach available to overcome this problem. We propose to develop a consensus-based checklist of essential items which

Testing the effectiveness of simplified search strategies for updating systematic reviews.

PubMed

Rice, Maureen; Ali, Muhammad Usman; Fitzpatrick-Lewis, Donna; Kenny, Meghan; Raina, Parminder; Sherifali, Diana

2017-08-01

The objective of the study was to test the overall effectiveness of a simplified search strategy (SSS) for updating systematic reviews. We identified nine systematic reviews undertaken by our research group for which both comprehensive and SSS updates were performed. Three relevant performance measures were estimated, that is, sensitivity, precision, and number needed to read (NNR). The update reference searches for all nine included systematic reviews identified a total of 55,099 citations that were screened resulting in final inclusion of 163 randomized controlled trials. As compared with reference search, the SSS resulted in 8,239 hits and had a median sensitivity of 83.3%, while precision and NNR were 4.5 times better. During analysis, we found that the SSS performed better for clinically focused topics, with a median sensitivity of 100% and precision and NNR 6 times better than for the reference searches. For broader topics, the sensitivity of the SSS was 80% while precision and NNR were 5.4 times better compared with reference search. SSS performed well for clinically focused topics and, with a median sensitivity of 100%, could be a viable alternative to a conventional comprehensive search strategy for updating this type of systematic reviews particularly considering the budget constraints and the volume of new literature being published. For broader topics, 80% sensitivity is likely to be considered too low for a systematic review update in most cases, although it might be acceptable if updating a scoping or rapid review. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Cochrane systematic reviews are useful to map research gaps for decreasing maternal mortality.

PubMed

Chapman, Evelina; Reveiz, Ludovic; Chambliss, Amy; Sangalang, Stephanie; Bonfill, Xavier

2013-01-01

To use an "evidence-mapping" approach to assess the usefulness of Cochrane reviews in identifying research gaps in the maternal health. The article describes the general mapping, prioritizing, reconciling, and updating approach: (1) identifying gaps in the maternal health research using published systematic reviews and formulating research questions, (2) prioritizing questions using Delphi method, (3) reconciling identified research priorities with the existing literature (i.e., searching of ongoing trials in trials registries), (4) updating the process. A comprehensive search of Cochrane systematic reviews published or updated from January 2006 to March 2011 was performed. We evaluated the "Implications for Research" section to identify gaps in the research. Our search strategy identified 695 references; 178 systematic reviews identifying at least one research gap were used. We formulated 319 research questions, which were classified into 11 different categories based on the direct and indirect causes of maternal mortality: postpartum hemorrhage, abortion, hypertensive disorders, infection/sepsis, caesarean section, diabetes, pregnancy prevention, preterm labor, other direct causes, indirect causes, and health policies and systems. Most research questions concerned the effectiveness of clinical interventions, including drugs (42.6%), nonpharmacologic interventions (16.3%), and health system (14.7%). It is possible to identify gaps in the maternal health research by using this approach. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Recent meta-analyses neglect previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses about the same topic: a systematic examination.

PubMed

Helfer, Bartosz; Prosser, Aaron; Samara, Myrto T; Geddes, John R; Cipriani, Andrea; Davis, John M; Mavridis, Dimitris; Salanti, Georgia; Leucht, Stefan

2015-04-14

As the number of systematic reviews is growing rapidly, we systematically investigate whether meta-analyses published in leading medical journals present an outline of available evidence by referring to previous meta-analyses and systematic reviews. We searched PubMed for recent meta-analyses of pharmacological treatments published in high impact factor journals. Previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses were identified with electronic searches of keywords and by searching reference sections. We analyzed the number of meta-analyses and systematic reviews that were cited, described and discussed in each recent meta-analysis. Moreover, we investigated publication characteristics that potentially influence the referencing practices. We identified 52 recent meta-analyses and 242 previous meta-analyses on the same topics. Of these, 66% of identified previous meta-analyses were cited, 36% described, and only 20% discussed by recent meta-analyses. The probability of citing a previous meta-analysis was positively associated with its publication in a journal with a higher impact factor (odds ratio, 1.49; 95% confidence interval, 1.06 to 2.10) and more recent publication year (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.37). Additionally, the probability of a previous study being described by the recent meta-analysis was inversely associated with the concordance of results (odds ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.17 to 0.88), and the probability of being discussed was increased for previous studies that employed meta-analytic methods (odds ratio, 32.36; 95% confidence interval, 2.00 to 522.85). Meta-analyses on pharmacological treatments do not consistently refer to and discuss findings of previous meta-analyses on the same topic. Such neglect can lead to research waste and be confusing for readers. Journals should make the discussion of related meta-analyses mandatory.

The Emergence of Systematic Review in Toxicology.

PubMed

Stephens, Martin L; Betts, Kellyn; Beck, Nancy B; Cogliano, Vincent; Dickersin, Kay; Fitzpatrick, Suzanne; Freeman, James; Gray, George; Hartung, Thomas; McPartland, Jennifer; Rooney, Andrew A; Scherer, Roberta W; Verloo, Didier; Hoffmann, Sebastian

2016-07-01

The Evidence-based Toxicology Collaboration hosted a workshop on "The Emergence of Systematic Review and Related Evidence-based Approaches in Toxicology," on November 21, 2014 in Baltimore, Maryland. The workshop featured speakers from agencies and organizations applying systematic review approaches to questions in toxicology, speakers with experience in conducting systematic reviews in medicine and healthcare, and stakeholders in industry, government, academia, and non-governmental organizations. Based on the workshop presentations and discussion, here we address the state of systematic review methods in toxicology, historical antecedents in both medicine and toxicology, challenges to the translation of systematic review from medicine to toxicology, and thoughts on the way forward. We conclude with a recommendation that as various agencies and organizations adapt systematic review methods, they continue to work together to ensure that there is a harmonized process for how the basic elements of systematic review methods are applied in toxicology. © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Toxicology.

The Emergence of Systematic Review in Toxicology

PubMed Central

Stephens, Martin L.; Betts, Kellyn; Beck, Nancy B.; Cogliano, Vincent; Dickersin, Kay; Fitzpatrick, Suzanne; Freeman, James; Gray, George; Hartung, Thomas; McPartland, Jennifer; Rooney, Andrew A.; Scherer, Roberta W.; Verloo, Didier; Hoffmann, Sebastian

2016-01-01

The Evidence-based Toxicology Collaboration hosted a workshop on “The Emergence of Systematic Review and Related Evidence-based Approaches in Toxicology,” on November 21, 2014 in Baltimore, Maryland. The workshop featured speakers from agencies and organizations applying systematic review approaches to questions in toxicology, speakers with experience in conducting systematic reviews in medicine and healthcare, and stakeholders in industry, government, academia, and non-governmental organizations. Based on the workshop presentations and discussion, here we address the state of systematic review methods in toxicology, historical antecedents in both medicine and toxicology, challenges to the translation of systematic review from medicine to toxicology, and thoughts on the way forward. We conclude with a recommendation that as various agencies and organizations adapt systematic review methods, they continue to work together to ensure that there is a harmonized process for how the basic elements of systematic review methods are applied in toxicology. PMID:27208075

A systematic review of systematic reviews on interventions for caregivers of people with chronic conditions.

PubMed

Corry, Margarita; While, Alison; Neenan, Kathleen; Smith, Valerie

2015-04-01

To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to support caregivers of people with selected chronic conditions. Informal caregivers provide millions of care hours each week contributing to significant healthcare savings. Despite much research evaluating a range of interventions for caregivers, their impact remains unclear. A systematic review of systematic reviews of interventions to support caregivers of people with selected chronic conditions. The electronic databases of PubMed, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, PsycINFO, Social Science Index (January 1990-May 2014) and The Cochrane Library (Issue 6, June 2014), were searched using Medical Subject Heading and index term combinations of the keywords caregiver, systematic review, intervention and named chronic conditions. Papers were included if they reported a systematic review of interventions for caregivers of people with chronic conditions. The methodological quality of the included reviews was independently assessed by two reviewers using R-AMSTAR. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers using a pre-designed data extraction form. Narrative synthesis of review findings was used to present the results. Eight systematic reviews were included. There was evidence that education and support programme interventions improved caregiver quality of life. Information-giving interventions improved caregiver knowledge for stroke caregivers. Education, support and information-giving interventions warrant further investigation across caregiver groups. A large-scale funded programme for caregiver research is required to ensure that studies are of high quality to inform service development across settings. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

What do Cochrane systematic reviews say about interventions for vitamin D supplementation?

PubMed

Mateussi, Mariana Vendramin; Latorraca, Carolina de Oliveira Cruz; Daou, Júlia Pozetti; Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera; Riera, Rachel; Pacheco, Rafael Leite; Pachito, Daniela Vianna

2017-01-01

Despite the high prevalence of vitamin D supplementation, its use remains controversial. The objective of this review was to identify and summarize the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews regarding vitamin D supplementation for preventing ortreating any clinical condition. Review of systematic reviews, conducted in the Discipline of Evidence-Based Medicine, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo. A search was conducted to identify all Cochrane systematic reviews that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Titles and abstracts were screened by two authors. We included 27 Cochrane systematic reviews: 10 assessing use of vitamin D for prevention and 17 for treatment. The reviews found moderate to high quality of evidence regarding the benefit of vitamin D for pregnant women (prevention of adverse events: preterm birth risk [rate ratio, RR 0.36; 95% confidence interval, CI 0.14 to 0.93] and low birthweight risk [RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.67]) and for asthma patients (reduction of severe exacerbations [RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.88]). No benefit was found regarding vitamin D supplementation alone (without calcium) for preventing hip or any new fracture. For all other outcomes assessed under various conditions, the current quality of evidence is low or unknown, and therefore insufficient for any recommendation. Based on moderate to high quality of evidence, the Cochrane systematic reviews included here showed that there were some benefits from vitamin D supplementation for pregnant women and asthma patients and no benefits for preventing fractures.

Cardiac rehabilitation for people with heart disease: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews.

PubMed

Anderson, L J; Taylor, R S

2014-12-15

Overviews are a new approach to summarising evidence and synthesising results from related systematic reviews. To conduct an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews to provide a contemporary review of the evidence for cardiac rehabilitation (CR), identify opportunities for merging or splitting existing Cochrane reviews, and identify current evidence gaps to inform new review titles. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched to identify reviews that address the objectives of this overview. Data presentation is descriptive with tabular presentations of review- and trial-level characteristics and results. The six included Cochrane systematic reviews were of high methodological quality and included 148 randomised controlled trials in 97,486 participants. Compared to usual care alone, exercise-based CR reduces hospital admissions and improves patient health related quality of life (HRQL) in low to moderate risk heart failure and coronary heart disease (CHD) patients. At 12 months or more follow-up, there was evidence of some reduction in mortality in patients with CHD. Psychological- and education-based interventions appear to have little impact on mortality or morbidity but may improve HRQL. Home- and centre-based programmes are equally effective in improving HRQL at similar costs. Selected interventions can increase the uptake of CR programmes but evidence to support interventions that improve adherence is weak. This overview confirms that exercise-based CR is effective and safe in the management of clinically stable heart failure and post-MI and PCI patients. We discuss the implications of this overview on the future direction of the Cochrane CR reviews portfolio. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

A systematic review of validated methods for identifying transfusion-related ABO incompatibility reactions using administrative and claims data.

PubMed

Carnahan, Ryan M; Kee, Vicki R

2012-01-01

This paper aimed to systematically review algorithms to identify transfusion-related ABO incompatibility reactions in administrative data, with a focus on studies that have examined the validity of the algorithms. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Iowa Drug Information Service database, and Embase. A Google Scholar search was also conducted because of the difficulty identifying relevant studies. Reviews were conducted by two investigators to identify studies using data sources from the USA or Canada because these data sources were most likely to reflect the coding practices of Mini-Sentinel data sources. One study was found that validated International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9-CM) codes representing transfusion reactions. None of these cases were ABO incompatibility reactions. Several studies consistently used ICD-9-CM code 999.6, which represents ABO incompatibility reactions, and a technical report identified the ICD-10 code for these reactions. One study included the E-code E8760 for mismatched blood in transfusion in the algorithm. Another study reported finding no ABO incompatibility reaction codes in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, which contains data of 2.23 million patients who received transfusions, raising questions about the sensitivity of administrative data for identifying such reactions. Two studies reported perfect specificity, with sensitivity ranging from 21% to 83%, for the code identifying allogeneic red blood cell transfusions in hospitalized patients. There is no information to assess the validity of algorithms to identify transfusion-related ABO incompatibility reactions. Further information on the validity of algorithms to identify transfusions would also be useful. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Tackling the wider social determinants of health and health inequalities: evidence from systematic reviews

PubMed Central

Gibson, M; Sowden, A; Wright, K; Whitehead, M; Petticrew, M

2010-01-01

Background There is increasing pressure to tackle the wider social determinants of health through the implementation of appropriate interventions. However, turning these demands for better evidence about interventions around the social determinants of health into action requires identifying what we already know and highlighting areas for further development. Methods Systematic review methodology was used to identify systematic reviews (from 2000 to 2007, developed countries only) that described the health effects of any intervention based on the wider social determinants of health: water and sanitation, agriculture and food, access to health and social care services, unemployment and welfare, working conditions, housing and living environment, education, and transport. Results Thirty systematic reviews were identified. Generally, the effects of interventions on health inequalities were unclear. However, there is suggestive systematic review evidence that certain categories of intervention may impact positively on inequalities or on the health of specific disadvantaged groups, particularly interventions in the fields of housing and the work environment. Conclusion Intervention studies that address inequalities in health are a priority area for future public health research. PMID:19692738

Identifying barriers for out of hospital emergency care in low and low-middle income countries: a systematic review.

PubMed

Kironji, Antony Gatebe; Hodkinson, Peter; de Ramirez, Sarah Stewart; Anest, Trisha; Wallis, Lee; Razzak, Junaid; Jenson, Alexander; Hansoti, Bhakti

2018-04-19

Out-of-hospital emergency care (OHEC), also known as prehospital care, has been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality from serious illness. We sought to summarize literature for low and low-middle income countries to identify barriers to and key interventions for OHEC delivery. We performed a systematic review of the peer reviewed literature from January 2005 to March 2015 in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. All articles referencing research from low and low-middle income countries addressing OHEC, emergency medical services, or transport/transfer of patients were included. We identified themes in the literature to form six categories of OHEC barriers. Data were collected using an electronic form and results were aggregated to produce a descriptive summary. A total 1927 titles were identified, 31 of which met inclusion criteria. Barriers to OHEC were divided into six categories that included: culture/community, infrastructure, communication/coordination, transport, equipment and personnel. Lack of transportation was a common problem, with 55% (17/31) of articles reporting this as a hindrance to OHEC. Ambulances were the most commonly mentioned (71%, 22/31) mode of transporting patients. However, many patients still relied on alternative means of transportation such as hired cars, and animal drawn carts. Sixty-one percent (19/31) of articles identified a lack of skilled personnel as a key barrier, with 32% (10/31) of OHEC being delivered by laypersons without formal training. Forty percent (12/31) of the systems identified in the review described a uniform access phone number for emergency medical service activation. Policy makers and researchers seeking to improve OHEC in low and low-middle income countries should focus on increasing the availability of transport and trained providers while improving patient access to the OHEC system. The review yielded articles with a primary focus in Africa, highlighting a need for future research in diverse

How do authors of systematic reviews deal with research malpractice and misconduct in original studies? A cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors

PubMed Central

Elia, Nadia; von Elm, Erik; Chatagner, Alexandra; Pöpping, Daniel M; Tramèr, Martin R

2016-01-01

Objectives To study whether systematic reviewers apply procedures to counter-balance some common forms of research malpractice such as not publishing completed research, duplicate publications, or selective reporting of outcomes, and to see whether they identify and report misconduct. Design Cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors. Participants 118 systematic reviews published in four journals (Ann Int Med, BMJ, JAMA, Lancet), and the Cochrane Library, in 2013. Main outcomes and measures Number (%) of reviews that applied procedures to reduce the impact of: (1) publication bias (through searching of unpublished trials), (2) selective outcome reporting (by contacting the authors of the original studies), (3) duplicate publications, (4) sponsors’ and (5) authors’ conflicts of interest, on the conclusions of the review, and (6) looked for ethical approval of the studies. Number (%) of reviewers who suspected misconduct are reported. The procedures applied were compared across journals. Results 80 (68%) reviewers confirmed their data. 59 (50%) reviews applied three or more procedures; 11 (9%) applied none. Unpublished trials were searched in 79 (66%) reviews. Authors of original studies were contacted in 73 (62%). Duplicate publications were searched in 81 (69%). 27 reviews (23%) reported sponsors of the included studies; 6 (5%) analysed their impact on the conclusions of the review. Five reviews (4%) looked at conflicts of interest of study authors; none of them analysed their impact. Three reviews (2.5%) looked at ethical approval of the studies. Seven reviews (6%) suspected misconduct; only 2 (2%) reported it explicitly. Procedures applied differed across the journals. Conclusions Only half of the systematic reviews applied three or more of the six procedures examined. Sponsors, conflicts of interest of authors and ethical approval remain overlooked. Research misconduct is sometimes identified, but rarely reported. Guidance on

Effective implementation of research into practice: an overview of systematic reviews of the health literature.

PubMed

Boaz, Annette; Baeza, Juan; Fraser, Alec

2011-06-22

The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of interventions has been developed to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice. A review of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of interventions designed to increase the use of research in clinical practice. A search for relevant systematic reviews was conducted of Medline and the Cochrane Database of Reviews 1998-2009. 13 systematic reviews containing 313 primary studies were included. Four strategy types are identified: audit and feedback; computerised decision support; opinion leaders; and multifaceted interventions. Nine of the reviews reported on multifaceted interventions. This review highlights the small effects of single interventions such as audit and feedback, computerised decision support and opinion leaders. Systematic reviews of multifaceted interventions claim an improvement in effectiveness over single interventions, with effect sizes ranging from small to moderate. This review found that a number of published systematic reviews fail to state whether the recommended practice change is based on the best available research evidence. This overview of systematic reviews updates the body of knowledge relating to the effectiveness of key mechanisms for improving clinical practice and service development. Multifaceted interventions are more likely to improve practice than single interventions such as audit and feedback. This review identified a small literature focusing explicitly on getting research evidence into clinical practice. It emphasizes the importance of ensuring that primary studies and systematic reviews are precise about the extent to which the reported interventions focus on changing practice based on research evidence (as opposed to other information codified in guidelines and education materials).

An optimal search filter for retrieving systematic reviews and meta-analyses

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Background Health-evidence.ca is an online registry of systematic reviews evaluating the effectiveness of public health interventions. Extensive searching of bibliographic databases is required to keep the registry up to date. However, search filters have been developed to assist in searching the extensive amount of published literature indexed. Search filters can be designed to find literature related to a certain subject (i.e. content-specific filter) or particular study designs (i.e. methodological filter). The objective of this paper is to describe the development and validation of the health-evidence.ca Systematic Review search filter and to compare its performance to other available systematic review filters. Methods This analysis of search filters was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL. The performance of thirty-one search filters in total was assessed. A validation data set of 219 articles indexed between January 2004 and December 2005 was used to evaluate performance on sensitivity, specificity, precision and the number needed to read for each filter. Results Nineteen of 31 search filters were effective in retrieving a high level of relevant articles (sensitivity scores greater than 85%). The majority achieved a high degree of sensitivity at the expense of precision and yielded large result sets. The main advantage of the health-evidence.ca Systematic Review search filter in comparison to the other filters was that it maintained the same level of sensitivity while reducing the number of articles that needed to be screened. Conclusions The health-evidence.ca Systematic Review search filter is a useful tool for identifying published systematic reviews, with further screening to identify those evaluating the effectiveness of public health interventions. The filter that narrows the focus saves considerable time and resources during updates of this online resource, without sacrificing sensitivity. PMID:22512835

Mental health interventions among older adults: A systematic review.

PubMed

Niclasen, Janni; Lund, Lisbeth; Obel, Carsten; Larsen, Lars

2018-05-01

The aim of the present study was to conduct a systematic review to identify documented mental health promotion interventions developed and tested among population-based older adults. A systematic review based on PRISMA guidelines. The literature was searched in PsycINFO and PubMed between June and September 2016. The Effective Public Health Practice Project tool was used to assess the quality of the included study. In total 53 randomized controlled trial studies qualified for the systematic review. Across studies, three types of common conceptual themes emerged for interventions, including: 1) individual characteristics; 2) content and structure of the interventions; and 3) implementation of the interventions. No specific interventions could be recommended on the aforementioned basis. We conclude that a number of factors are of central importance for an intervention to have the desired effect. If these factors are considered, mental health can be successfully promoted among older adults.

Prenatal counselling for congenital anomalies: a systematic review.

PubMed

Marokakis, Sarah; Kasparian, Nadine A; Kennedy, Sean E

2016-07-01

Prenatal diagnosis of fetal anomalies may arouse fear, anxiety and distress in parents, and counselling may assist parents to cope with the diagnosis. This systematic review aimed to (1) synthesise the evidence on the impact of non-genetic, prenatal counselling after fetal diagnosis of a congenital anomaly on parental knowledge and psychological adjustment and (2) identify parents' preferences for the timing and format of counselling. Five electronic databases were systematically searched to identify studies assessing prenatal counselling provided to parents after prenatal diagnosis of one or more structural congenital anomalies. Data were extracted using predefined data forms, according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines, and synthesised. Twenty four articles were included for review; most articles reported results of retrospective surveys and the quality of included studies was variable. Only three studies assessed parental anxiety, and each reported a significant decrease in anxiety following prenatal counselling. Parents expressed a preference for counselling on all aspects of their baby's anomaly as soon as possible after prenatal diagnosis, and desired written, visual and web-based information resources, and support group contacts. Although prenatal counselling reduced parental anxiety, further research is needed to adequately assess the impact of prenatal counselling on other psychological outcomes. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Systematic reviews in context: highlighting systematic reviews relevant to Africa in the Pan African Medical Journal.

PubMed

Wiysonge, Charles Shey; Kamadjeu, Raoul; Tsague, Landry

2016-01-01

Health research serves to answer questions concerning health and to accumulate facts (evidence) required to guide healthcare policy and practice. However, research designs vary and different types of healthcare questions are best answered by different study designs. For example, qualitative studies are best suited for answering questions about experiences and meaning; cross-sectional studies for questions concerning prevalence; cohort studies for questions regarding incidence and prognosis; and randomised controlled trials for questions on prevention and treatment. In each case, one study would rarely yield sufficient evidence on which to reliably base a healthcare decision. An unbiased and transparent summary of all existing studies on a given question (i.e. a systematic review) tells a better story than any one of the included studies taken separately. A systematic review enables producers and users of research to gauge what a new study has contributed to knowledge by setting the study's findings in the context of all previous studies investigating the same question. It is therefore inappropriate to initiate a new study without first conducting a systematic review to find out what can be learnt from existing studies. There is nothing new in taking account of earlier studies in either the design or interpretation of new studies. For example, in the 18th century James Lind conducted a clinical trial followed by a systematic review of contemporary treatments for scurvy; which showed fruits to be an effective treatment for the disease. However, surveys of the peer-reviewed literature continue to provide empirical evidence that systematic reviews are seldom used in the design and interpretation of the findings of new studies. Such indifference to systematic reviews as a research function is unethical, unscientific, and uneconomical. Without systematic reviews, limited resources are very likely to be squandered on ill-conceived research and policies. In order to

The application of quantitative methods for identifying and exploring the presence of bias in systematic reviews: PDE-5 inhibitors for erectile dysfunction.

PubMed

Bekkering, G E; Abou-Setta, A M; Kleijnen, J

2008-01-01

A systematic review of PDE-5 inhibitors for erectile dysfunction was performed to evaluate the utility of quantitative methods for identifying and exploring the influence of bias and study quality on pooled outcomes from meta-analyses. We included 123 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methodological quality was poorly reported. All three drugs appeared highly effective. Indirect adjusted analyses showed no differences between the three drugs. Funnel plots and statistical tests showed no evidence of small-study effects for sildenafil whereas there was evidence of such bias for tadalafil and vardenafil. Adjustment for missing studies using trim and fill techniques did not alter the pooled estimates substantially. The exclusion of previous sildenafil nonresponders was associated with larger treatment effects for tadalafil. This investigation was hampered by poor reporting of methodological quality, a low number of studies, heterogeneity and large effect sizes. Despite such limitations, a comprehensive assessment of biases should be a routine in systematic reviews.

Communication Intervention in Rett Syndrome: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Sigafoos, Jeff; Green, Vanessa A.; Schlosser, Ralf; O'eilly, Mark F.; Lancioni, Giulio E.; Rispoli, Mandy; Lang, Russell

2009-01-01

We reviewed communication intervention studies involving people with Rett syndrome. Systematic searches of five electronic databases, selected journals, and reference lists identified nine studies meeting the inclusion criteria. These studies were evaluated in terms of: (a) participant characteristics, (b) target skills, (c) procedures, (d) main…

A protocol for a systematic review to identify allergenic tree nuts and the molecules responsible for their allergenic properties.

PubMed

Javed, Bushra; Padfield, Philip; Sperrin, Matthew; Simpson, Angela; Mills, E N Clare

2017-08-01

Food regulations require that tree nuts and derived ingredients are included on food labels in order to help individuals with IgE-mediated allergies to avoid them. However, there is no consensus regarding which tree nut species should be included in this definition and specified on food labels. Allergen detection methods used for monitoring foods target allergen molecules, but it not clear which are the most relevant molecules to choose. A modified population-exposure-comparators-outcome (PECO) approach has been developed to systematically review the evidence regarding (1) which allergenic tree nuts should be included in food allergen labelling lists and (2) which are the clinically relevant allergens which should be used as analytical targets. A search strategy and criteria against which the evidence will be evaluated have been developed. The resulting evidence will be used to rank tree nuts with regards their ability to cause IgE-mediated allergies, and allergen molecules regarding their capacity to elicit an allergic reaction. The results of the systematic review will enable risk assessors and managers to identify tree nut species that should be included in food allergen labelling lists and ensure analytical methods for determination of allergens in foods are targeting appropriate molecules. Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

32 CFR 2001.31 - Systematic declassification review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... 32 National Defense 6 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Systematic declassification review. 2001.31... Declassification § 2001.31 Systematic declassification review. (a) General. Agencies shall establish systematic review programs for those records containing information exempted from automatic declassification. This...

22 CFR 9.11 - Systematic declassification review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 22 Foreign Relations 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Systematic declassification review. 9.11... Systematic declassification review. The Information and Privacy Coordinator shall be responsible for conducting a program for systematic declassification review of historically valuable records that were...

32 CFR 2001.31 - Systematic declassification review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

... 32 National Defense 6 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Systematic declassification review. 2001.31... Declassification § 2001.31 Systematic declassification review. (a) General. Agencies shall establish systematic review programs for those records containing information exempted from automatic declassification. This...

BUNDLE OF MEASURES TO SUPPORT INTRAHOSPITAL EXCLUSIVE BREASTFEEDING: EVIDENCE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS.

PubMed

Coca, Kelly Pereira; Pinto, Vânia Lopes; Westphal, Flavia; Mania, Pâmilla Nayara Alves; Abrão, Ana Cristina Freitas de Vilhena

2018-04-23

To identify the main recommendations found in systematic reviews regarding exclusive breastfeeding protective factors. Integrative review based on the guiding question: What evidence is found in literature regarding the protective factors of exclusive breastfeeding during the intrahospital period? A search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE and LILACS database using the keyword "Breast Feeding" and the word "Breastfeeding". Systematic reviews published from 2007 to 2016 that answered the guiding question were included in the study, whereas systematic reviews that analyzed breastfeeding of preterm infants and breastfeeding of children with orofacial malformation were excluded. The sample included eight systematic reviews. The recommendations related to the protective factors for exclusive in-hospital breastfeeding found in the systematic reviews were: early skin-to-skin contact, rooming-in care, intervention for treating painful nipples during breastfeeding, restriction of infant supplementation, baby-led breastfeeding and educational interventions and support for mothers during hospital stay. The proposed measures included the six practices presented as protective factors. The review enabled the identification of evidence to support the recommended measures from delivery room to hospital discharge, with the aim of encouraging breastfeeding and preventing intrahospital weaning.

Systematic reviews involving complementary and alternative medicine interventions had higher quality of reporting than conventional medicine reviews.

PubMed

Lawson, Margaret L; Pham, Ba'; Klassen, Terry P; Moher, David

2005-08-01

To compare the quality of systematic reviews reported in English and in languages other than English, and to determine whether there are differences between conventional medicine (CM) and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) reports. We used the Oxman and Guyatt (OG) scale to assess the quality of reporting in 130 systematic reviews: 50 were language-restricted, 32 were language-inclusive but only English-language (EL) trials contained (inclusive-EL), and 48 were language-inclusive and included trials published in languages other than English (inclusive-LOE). Of the 130 reviews, 105 addressed CM interventions and 25 addressed CAM interventions. Comparison of the systematic reviews showed that the quality of reporting and reporting characteristics are not affected by inclusion or exclusion of LOE; however, the quality of reporting of systematic reviews involving CAM interventions is higher than that of reviews focusing on CM interventions. Informal comparison of the OG scale with the data collected on quality assessments showed that the OG scale performs well overall but may not identify important differences in comprehensiveness of the search strategy and avoidance of bias in study selection. Further research is required to determine the best methods for assessing quality of systematic reviews and whether the effect of language restrictions is dependent on the type of intervention (CM or CAM).

Reporting and handling missing outcome data in mental health: a systematic review of Cochrane systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

PubMed

Spineli, Loukia M; Pandis, Nikolaos; Salanti, Georgia

2015-06-01

The purpose of the study was to provide empirical evidence about the reporting of methodology to address missing outcome data and the acknowledgement of their impact in Cochrane systematic reviews in the mental health field. Systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews after January 1, 2009 by three Cochrane Review Groups relating to mental health were included. One hundred ninety systematic reviews were considered. Missing outcome data were present in at least one included study in 175 systematic reviews. Of these 175 systematic reviews, 147 (84%) accounted for missing outcome data by considering a relevant primary or secondary outcome (e.g., dropout). Missing outcome data implications were reported only in 61 (35%) systematic reviews and primarily in the discussion section by commenting on the amount of the missing outcome data. One hundred forty eligible meta-analyses with missing data were scrutinized. Seventy-nine (56%) of them had studies with total dropout rate between 10 and 30%. One hundred nine (78%) meta-analyses reported to have performed intention-to-treat analysis by including trials with imputed outcome data. Sensitivity analysis for incomplete outcome data was implemented in less than 20% of the meta-analyses. Reporting of the techniques for handling missing outcome data and their implications in the findings of the systematic reviews are suboptimal. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Evaluating barriers to adopting telemedicine worldwide: A systematic review.

PubMed

Scott Kruse, Clemens; Karem, Priyanka; Shifflett, Kelli; Vegi, Lokesh; Ravi, Karuna; Brooks, Matthew

2018-01-01

Introduction and objective Studies on telemedicine have shown success in reducing the geographical and time obstacles incurred in the receipt of care in traditional modalities with the same or greater effectiveness; however, there are several barriers that need to be addressed in order for telemedicine technology to spread. The aim of this review is to evaluate barriers to adopting telemedicine worldwide through the analysis of published work. Methods The authors conducted a systematic literature review by extracting the data from the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and PubMed (MEDLINE) research databases. The reviewers in this study analysed 30 articles (nine from CINAHL and 21 from Medline) and identified barriers found in the literature. This review followed the checklist from Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2009. The reviewers organized the results into one table and five figures that depict the data in different ways, organized by: barrier, country-specific barriers, organization-specific barriers, patient-specific barriers, and medical-staff and programmer-specific barriers. Results The reviewers identified 33 barriers with a frequency of 100 occurrences through the 30 articles. The study identified the issues with technically challenged staff (11%), followed by resistance to change (8%), cost (8%), reimbursement (5%), age of patient (5%), and level of education of patient (5%). All other barriers occurred at or less than 4% of the time. Discussion and conclusions Telemedicine is not yet ubiquitous, and barriers vary widely. The top barriers are technology-specific and could be overcome through training, change-management techniques, and alternating delivery by telemedicine and personal patient-to-provider interaction. The results of this study identify several barriers that could be eliminated by focused policy. Future work should evaluate policy to identify which one to lever to

Twelve recommendations for integrating existing systematic reviews into new reviews: EPC guidance.

PubMed

Robinson, Karen A; Chou, Roger; Berkman, Nancy D; Newberry, Sydne J; Fu, Rongwei; Hartling, Lisa; Dryden, Donna; Butler, Mary; Foisy, Michelle; Anderson, Johanna; Motu'apuaka, Makalapua; Relevo, Rose; Guise, Jeanne-Marie; Chang, Stephanie

2016-02-01

As time and cost constraints in the conduct of systematic reviews increase, the need to consider the use of existing systematic reviews also increases. We developed guidance on the integration of systematic reviews into new reviews. A workgroup of methodologists from Evidence-based Practice Centers developed consensus-based recommendations. Discussions were informed by a literature scan and by interviews with organizations that conduct systematic reviews. Twelve recommendations were developed addressing selecting reviews, assessing risk of bias, qualitative and quantitative synthesis, and summarizing and assessing body of evidence. We provide preliminary guidance for an efficient and unbiased approach to integrating existing systematic reviews with primary studies in a new review. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Disaster-Driven Evacuation and Medication Loss: a Systematic Literature Review

PubMed Central

Ochi, Sae; Hodgson, Susan; Landeg, Owen; Mayner, Lidia; Murray, Virginia

2014-01-01

AIM: The aim of this systematic literature review was to identify the extent and implications of medication loss and the burden of prescription refill on medical relief teams following extreme weather events and other natural hazards. METHOD: The search strategy followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Key health journal databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Maternity and Infant Care, and Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC)) were searched via the OvidSP search engine. Search terms were identified by consulting MeSH terms. The inclusion criteria comprised articles published from January 2003 to August 2013, written in English and containing an abstract. The exclusion criteria included abstracts for conferences or dissertations, book chapters and articles written in a language other than English. A total of 70 articles which fulfilled the inclusion criteria were included in this systematic review. RESULTS: All relevant information was collated regarding medication loss, prescription loss and refills, and medical aids loss which indicated a significant burden on the medical relief teams. Data also showed the difficulty in filling prescriptions due to lack of information from the evacuees. People with chronic conditions are most at risk when their medication is not available. This systematic review also showed that medical aids such as eye glasses, hearing aids as well as dental treatment are a high necessity among evacuees. DISCUSSION: This systematic review revealed that a considerable number of patients lose their medication during evacuation, many lose essential medical aids such as insulin pens and many do not bring prescriptions with them when evacuated.. Since medication loss is partly a responsibility of evacuees, understanding the impact of medication loss may lead to raising awareness and better preparations among the patients and health care professionals. People who are not prepared could have

Rational decision-making in mental health: the role of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Gilbody, Simon M.; Petticrew, Mark

1999-09-01

BACKGROUND: "Systematic reviews" have come to be recognized as the most rigorous method of summarizing confusing and often contradictory primary research in a transparent and reproducible manner. Their greatest impact has been in the summarization of epidemiological literature - particularly that relating to clinical effectiveness. Systematic reviews also have a potential to inform rational decision-making in healthcare policy and to form a component of economic evaluation. AIMS OF THE STUDY: This article aims to introduce the rationale behind systematic reviews and, using examples from mental health, to introduce the strengths and limitations of systematic reviews, particularly in informing mental health policy and economic evaluation. METHODS: Examples are selected from recent controversies surrounding the introduction of new psychiatric drugs (anti-depressants and anti-schizophrenia drugs) and methods of delivering psychiatric care in the community (case management and assertive community treatment). The potential for systematic reviews to (i) produce best estimates of clinical efficacy and effectiveness, (ii) aid economic evaluation and policy decision-making and (iii) highlight gaps in the primary research knowledge base are discussed. Lastly examples are selected from outside mental health to show how systematic reviews have a potential to be explicitly used in economic and health policy evaluation. RESULTS: Systematic reviews produce the best estimates of clinical efficacy, which can form an important component of economic evaluation. Importantly, serious methodological flaws and areas of uncertainty in the primary research literature are identified within an explicit framework. Summary indices of clinical effectiveness can be produced, but it is difficult to produce such summary indices of cost effectiveness by pooling economic data from primary studies. Modelling is commonly used in economic and policy evaluation. Here, systematic reviews can provide the

Ophthalmic adverse drug reactions to systemic drugs: a systematic review.

PubMed

Miguel, Ana; Henriques, Filipe; Azevedo, Luís Filipe; Pereira, Altamiro Costa

2014-03-01

To perform a comprehensive and systematic review regarding ophthalmic adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to systemic drugs to: (i) systematically summarize existing evidence, (ii) identify areas, ophthalmic ADRs or drugs that lacked systematization or assessment (namely drugs with original studies characterizing specific ophthalmic ADRs but without causality assessment nor without meta-analysis). Systematic review of several electronic databases (last search 1/7/2012): Medline, SCOPUS, ISI web of knowledge, ISI Conference Proceedings, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts and Google scholar. Search query included: eye, ocular, ophthalmic, ophthalmology, adverse and reaction. Inclusion criteria were: (i) Primary purpose was to assess an ophthalmic ADR to a systemic medication; (ii) Patient evaluation performed by an ophthalmologist; (iii) Studies that specified diagnostic criteria for an ocular ADR. Different types of studies were included and analyzed separately. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility criteria, extracted data and evaluated risk of bias. From 562 studies found, 32 were included (1 systematic review to sildenafil, 11 narrative reviews, 1 trial, 1 prospective study, 6 transversal studies, 6 spontaneous reports and 6 case series). Drugs frequently involved included amiodarone, sildenafil, hydroxychloroquine and biphosphonates. Frequent ophthalmic ADRs included: keratopathy, dry eye and retinopathy. To increase evidence about ophthalmic ADRs, there is a need for performing specific systematic reviews, applying strictly the World Health Organization's (WHO) definition of ADR and WHO causality assessment of ADRs. Some ophthalmic ADRs may be frequent, but require ophthalmological examination; therefore, ophthalmologists' education and protocols of collaboration between other specialties whenever they prescribe high-risk drugs are suggestions for the future. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Systematic reviews, systematic error and the acquisition of clinical knowledge

PubMed Central

2010-01-01

Background Since its inception, evidence-based medicine and its application through systematic reviews, has been widely accepted. However, it has also been strongly criticised and resisted by some academic groups and clinicians. One of the main criticisms of evidence-based medicine is that it appears to claim to have unique access to absolute scientific truth and thus devalues and replaces other types of knowledge sources. Discussion The various types of clinical knowledge sources are categorised on the basis of Kant's categories of knowledge acquisition, as being either 'analytic' or 'synthetic'. It is shown that these categories do not act in opposition but rather, depend upon each other. The unity of analysis and synthesis in knowledge acquisition is demonstrated during the process of systematic reviewing of clinical trials. Systematic reviews constitute comprehensive synthesis of clinical knowledge but depend upon plausible, analytical hypothesis development for the trials reviewed. The dangers of systematic error regarding the internal validity of acquired knowledge are highlighted on the basis of empirical evidence. It has been shown that the systematic review process reduces systematic error, thus ensuring high internal validity. It is argued that this process does not exclude other types of knowledge sources. Instead, amongst these other types it functions as an integrated element during the acquisition of clinical knowledge. Conclusions The acquisition of clinical knowledge is based on interaction between analysis and synthesis. Systematic reviews provide the highest form of synthetic knowledge acquisition in terms of achieving internal validity of results. In that capacity it informs the analytic knowledge of the clinician but does not replace it. PMID:20537172

Review Article: Influenza Transmission on Aircraft: A Systematic Literature Review.

PubMed

Leitmeyer, Katrin; Adlhoch, Cornelia

2016-09-01

Air travel is associated with the spread of influenza through infected passengers and potentially through in-flight transmission. Contact tracing after exposure to influenza is not performed systematically. We performed a systematic literature review to evaluate the evidence for influenza transmission aboard aircraft. Using PubMed and EMBASE databases, we identified and critically appraised identified records to assess the evidence of such transmission to passengers seated in close proximity to the index cases. We also developed a bias assessment tool to evaluate the quality of evidence provided in the retrieved studies. We identified 14 peer-reviewed publications describing contact tracing of passengers after possible exposure to influenza virus aboard an aircraft. Contact tracing during the initial phase of the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 pandemic was described in 11 publications. The studies describe the follow-up of 2,165 (51%) of 4,252 traceable passengers. Altogether, 163 secondary cases were identified resulting in an overall secondary attack rate among traced passengers of 7.5%. Of these secondary cases, 68 (42%) were seated within two rows of the index case. We found an overall moderate quality of evidence for transmission of influenza virus aboard an aircraft. The major limiting factor was the comparability of the studies. A majority of secondary cases was identified at a greater distance than two rows from the index case. A standardized approach for initiating, conducting, and reporting contact tracing could help to increase the evidence base for better assessing influenza transmission aboard aircraft.

An approach to addressing subpopulation considerations in systematic reviews: the experience of reviewers supporting the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

PubMed

Whitlock, Evelyn P; Eder, Michelle; Thompson, Jamie H; Jonas, Daniel E; Evans, Corinne V; Guirguis-Blake, Janelle M; Lin, Jennifer S

2017-03-02

Guideline developers and other users of systematic reviews need information about whether a medical or preventive intervention is likely to benefit or harm some patients more (or less) than the average in order to make clinical practice recommendations tailored to these populations. However, guidance is lacking on how to include patient subpopulation considerations into the systematic reviews upon which guidelines are often based. In this article, we describe methods developed to consistently consider the evidence for relevant subpopulations in systematic reviews conducted to support primary care clinical preventive service recommendations made by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Our approach is grounded in our experience conducting systematic reviews for the USPSTF and informed by a review of existing guidance on subgroup analysis and subpopulation issues. We developed and refined our approach based on feedback from the Subpopulation Workgroup of the USPSTF and pilot testing on reviews being conducted for the USPSTF. This paper provides processes and tools for incorporating evidence-based identification of important sources of potential heterogeneity of intervention effects into all phases of systematic reviews. Key components of our proposed approach include targeted literature searches and key informant interviews to identify the most important subpopulations a priori during topic scoping, a framework for assessing the credibility of subgroup analyses reported in studies, and structured investigation of sources of heterogeneity of intervention effects. Further testing and evaluation are necessary to refine this proposed approach and demonstrate its utility to the producers and users of systematic reviews beyond the context of the USPSTF. Gaps in the evidence on important subpopulations identified by routinely applying this process in systematic reviews will also inform future research needs.

An assessment of the efficacy of searching in biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE in identifying studies for a systematic review on ward closures as an infection control intervention to control outbreaks.

PubMed

Kwon, Yoojin; Powelson, Susan E; Wong, Holly; Ghali, William A; Conly, John M

2014-11-11

The purpose of our study is to determine the value and efficacy of searching biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE for systematic reviews. We analyzed the results from a systematic review conducted by the authors and others on ward closure as an infection control practice. Ovid MEDLINE including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid Embase, CINAHL Plus, LILACS, and IndMED were systematically searched for articles of any study type discussing ward closure, as were bibliographies of selected articles and recent infection control conference abstracts. Search results were tracked, recorded, and analyzed using a relative recall method. The sensitivity of searching in each database was calculated. Two thousand ninety-five unique citations were identified and screened for inclusion in the systematic review: 2,060 from database searching and 35 from hand searching and other sources. Ninety-seven citations were included in the final review. MEDLINE and Embase searches each retrieved 80 of the 97 articles included, only 4 articles from each database were unique. The CINAHL search retrieved 35 included articles, and 4 were unique. The IndMED and LILACS searches did not retrieve any included articles, although 75 of the included articles were indexed in LILACS. The true value of using regional databases, particularly LILACS, may lie with the ability to search in the language spoken in the region. Eight articles were found only through hand searching. Identifying studies for a systematic review where the research is observational is complex. The value each individual study contributes to the review cannot be accurately measured. Consequently, we could not determine the value of results found from searching beyond MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL with accuracy. However, hand searching for serendipitous retrieval remains an important aspect due to indexing and keyword challenges inherent in this literature.

Career choice in academic medicine: systematic review.

PubMed

Straus, Sharon E; Straus, Christine; Tzanetos, Katina

2006-12-01

To review systematically the evidence about what factors influence the decision to choose or not choose a career in academic medicine. A systematic review of relevant literature from 1990 to May 2005. Searches of The Cochrane Library, Medline (using Ovid and PubMed) from 1990 to May 2005, and EMBASE from 1990 to May 2005 were completed to identify relevant studies that explored the influential factors. Additional articles were identified from searching the bibliographies of retrieved articles. We attempted to identify studies that included residents, fellows, or staff physicians. No restrictions were placed on the study methodologies identified and all articles presenting empirical evidence were retrieved. For cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies, minimum inclusion criteria were the presence of defined groups, and the ability to extract relevant data. For surveys that involved case series, minimum inclusion criteria were a description of the population, and the availability of extractable data. Minimum inclusion criteria for qualitative studies were descriptions of the sampling strategy and methods. The search identified 251 abstracts; 25 articles were included in this review. Completion of an MD with a graduate degree or fellowship program is associated with a career in academic medicine. Of the articles identified in this review, this finding is supported by the highest quality of evidence. Similarly, the completion of research and publication of this research in medical school and residency are associated with a career in academic medicine. The desire to teach, conduct research, and the intellectual stimulation and challenge provided in academia may also persuade people to choose this career path. The influence of a role model or a mentor was reported by physicians to impact their decision making. Trainees' interest in academic medicine wanes as they progress through their residency. In order to revitalize academic medicine, we must engage trainees

Recording and accounting for stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews.

PubMed

Saan, Marieke C; Boeije, Hennie R; Sattoe, Jane N T; Bal, Marjolijn I; Missler, Marjolein; van Wesel, Floryt

2015-06-01

The use of stakeholders in systematic reviews is increasingly valued, but their influence on the systematicity of the review is often unclear. The aim of this study was to describe some of the processes of involvement of stakeholders and to demonstrate a Tool for Recording and Accounting for Stakeholder Involvement (TRASI). We demonstrate the TRASI in two worked examples. In one project, the reviewers collaborated with the end-user and an expert during the literature search. In the other project, experts were consulted to generate keywords before searching the literature. In the first project, disagreements about keywords to identify studies for the research topic were solved by informal discussion. In the second project, difficulties arose in reaching agreement between experts and reviewers about the core construct and the meaningful keywords associated with it. The TRASI aids researchers to systematically and transparently account for the decisions taken. The TRASI supports information specialists and librarians to shape the search strategy to match the objectives of the review. We propose the TRASI as a first step in resolving the challenges of detecting and reconstructing stakeholder influences. Potential new applications of the TRASI are discussed. © 2015 Health Libraries Group.

Nasal Septal Deviations: A Systematic Review of Classification Systems.

PubMed

Teixeira, Jeffrey; Certal, Victor; Chang, Edward T; Camacho, Macario

2016-01-01

Objective. To systematically review the international literature for internal nasal septal deviation classification systems and summarize them for clinical and research purposes. Data Sources. Four databases (including PubMed/MEDLINE) were systematically searched through December 16, 2015. Methods. Systematic review, adhering to PRISMA. Results. After removal of duplicates, this study screened 952 articles for relevance. A final comprehensive review of 50 articles identified that 15 of these articles met the eligibility criteria. The classification systems defined in these articles included C-shaped, S-shaped, reverse C-shaped, and reverse S-shaped descriptions of the septal deviation in both the cephalocaudal and anteroposterior dimensions. Additional studies reported use of computed tomography and categorized deviation based on predefined locations. Three studies graded the severity of septal deviations based on the amount of deflection. The systems defined in the literature also included an evaluation of nasal septal spurs and perforations. Conclusion. This systematic review ascertained that the majority of the currently published classification systems for internal nasal septal deviations can be summarized by C-shaped or reverse C-shaped, as well as S-shaped or reverse S-shaped deviations in the anteroposterior and cephalocaudal dimensions. For imaging studies, predefined points have been defined along the septum. Common terminology can facilitate future research.

Failure or success of search strategies to identify adverse effects of medical devices: a feasibility study using a systematic review.

PubMed

Golder, Su; Wright, Kath; Rodgers, Mark

2014-10-13

Research has indicated that adverse effects terms are increasingly prevalent in the title, abstract or indexing terms of articles that contain adverse drug effects data in MEDLINE and Embase. However, it is unknown whether adverse effects terms are present in the database records of articles that contain adverse effects data of medical devices, and thus, to what extent the development of an adverse effects search filter for medical devices may be feasible. A case study systematic review of a medical device was selected. The included studies from a systematic review of the safety of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) for spinal fusion were used in the analysis. For each included study, the corresponding database record on MEDLINE and Embase was assessed to measure the presence or absence of adverse effects terms in the title, abstract or indexing. The performance of each potential adverse effects search term was also measured and compared. There were 82 publications (49 studies) included in the systematic review with 51 of these indexed on MEDLINE and 55 on Embase. Ninety-four percent (48/51) of the records on MEDLINE and 95% (52/55) of the records on Embase contained at least one adverse effects related search term. The wide variety of adverse effects terms included in the title, abstract or indexing of bibliographic records, and the lack of any individual high-performing search terms suggests that a combination of terms in different fields is required to identify adverse effects of medical devices. In addition, the most successful search terms differed from the most successful terms for identifying adverse drug effects. The search filters currently available for adverse drug effects are not necessarily useful for searching adverse effects data of medical devices. The presence of adverse effects terms in the bibliographic records of articles on medical devices, however, indicates that combinations of adverse effects search terms may be useful

Making literature reviews more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews.

PubMed

Haddaway, N R; Woodcock, P; Macura, B; Collins, A

2015-12-01

Review articles can provide valuable summaries of the ever-increasing volume of primary research in conservation biology. Where findings may influence important resource-allocation decisions in policy or practice, there is a need for a high degree of reliability when reviewing evidence. However, traditional literature reviews are susceptible to a number of biases during the identification, selection, and synthesis of included studies (e.g., publication bias, selection bias, and vote counting). Systematic reviews, pioneered in medicine and translated into conservation in 2006, address these issues through a strict methodology that aims to maximize transparency, objectivity, and repeatability. Systematic reviews will always be the gold standard for reliable synthesis of evidence. However, traditional literature reviews remain popular and will continue to be valuable where systematic reviews are not feasible. Where traditional reviews are used, lessons can be taken from systematic reviews and applied to traditional reviews in order to increase their reliability. Certain key aspects of systematic review methods that can be used in a context-specific manner in traditional reviews include focusing on mitigating bias; increasing transparency, consistency, and objectivity, and critically appraising the evidence and avoiding vote counting. In situations where conducting a full systematic review is not feasible, the proposed approach to reviewing evidence in a more systematic way can substantially improve the reliability of review findings, providing a time- and resource-efficient means of maximizing the value of traditional reviews. These methods are aimed particularly at those conducting literature reviews where systematic review is not feasible, for example, for graduate students, single reviewers, or small organizations. © 2015 Society for Conservation Biology.

Psychological profile of sasang typology: a systematic review.

PubMed

Chae, Han; Park, Soo Hyun; Lee, Soo Jin; Kim, Myoung-Geun; Wedding, Danny; Kwon, Young-Kyu

2009-09-01

A systematic review of studies related to the psychological characteristics of Sasang types was conducted with the goal of delineating generalizable psychological profiles based on Sasang typology, a traditional Korean medical typology with medical herbs and acupuncture that is characterized as personalized medicine. Journal articles pertaining to Sasang typology were collected using five electronic database systems in Korea and in the USA. As a result, 64 potentially relevant studies were identified and 21 peer-reviewed research articles that employed psychometric inventories were included. Beginning with the use of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory in 1992, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, NEO-Personality Inventory, Temperament and Character Inventory and other personality assessment tools were employed in the identified studies. Because data synthesis could not be carried out due to the heterogeneity of the studies, the present review article sought to delineate the mutual relevance of the studies based on research results pertaining to the correlation between the aforementioned psychological assessment instruments. Results of the review indicate that two super-factors, Extraversion and Neuroticism, serve as the foundation in regards to delineating personality constructs, such that the So-Yang type scored high on the Extraversion dimension and low on the Neuroticism dimension, while the So-Eum type scored low on the Extraversion dimension and high on the Neuroticism dimension. The present systematic review indicates that Sasang typology shares similarities with the Western psychological tradition.

Surface electromyography in animals: A systematic review

PubMed Central

Valentin, Stephanie; Zsoldos, Rebeka R.

2017-01-01

The study of muscle activity using surface electromyography (sEMG) is commonly used for investigations of the neuromuscular system in man. Although sEMG has faced methodological challenges, considerable technical advances have been made in the last few decades. Similarly, the field of animal biomechanics, including sEMG, has grown despite being confronted with often complex experimental conditions. In human sEMG research, standardised protocols have been developed, however these are lacking in animal sEMG. Before standards can be proposed in this population group, the existing research in animal sEMG should be collated and evaluated. Therefore the aim of this review is to systematically identify and summarise the literature in animal sEMG focussing on (1) species, breeds, activities and muscles investigated, and (2) electrode placement and normalisation methods used. The databases PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Vetmed Resource were searched systematically for sEMG studies in animals and 38 articles were included in the final review. Data on methodological quality was collected and summarised. The findings from this systematic review indicate the divergence in animal sEMG methodology and as a result, future steps required to develop standardisation in animal sEMG are proposed. PMID:26763600

A systematic review of methods for studying consumer health YouTube videos, with implications for systematic reviews.

PubMed

Sampson, Margaret; Cumber, Jordi; Li, Claudia; Pound, Catherine M; Fuller, Ann; Harrison, Denise

2013-01-01

Background. YouTube is an increasingly important medium for consumer health information - with content provided by healthcare professionals, government and non-government organizations, industry, and consumers themselves. It is a rapidly developing area of study for healthcare researchers. We examine the methods used in reviews of YouTube consumer health videos to identify trends and best practices. Methods and Materials. Published reviews of consumer-oriented health-related YouTube videos were identified through PubMed. Data extracted from these studies included type of journal, topic, characteristics of the search, methods of review including number of reviewers and method to achieve consensus between reviewers, inclusion and exclusion criteria, characteristics of the videos reported, ethical oversight, and follow-up. Results. Thirty-three studies were identified. Most were recent and published in specialty journals. Typically, these included more than 100 videos, and were examined by multiple reviewers. Most studies described characteristics of the videos, number of views, and sometime characteristics of the viewers. Accuracy of portrayal of the health issue under consideration was a common focus. Conclusion. Optimal transparency and reproducibility of studies of YouTube health-related videos can be achieved by following guidance designed for systematic review reporting, with attention to several elements specific to the video medium. Particularly when seeking to replicate consumer viewing behavior, investigators should consider the method used to select search terms, and use a snowballing rather than a sequential screening approach. Discontinuation protocols for online screening of relevance ranked search results is an area identified for further development.

A systematic review of methods for studying consumer health YouTube videos, with implications for systematic reviews

PubMed Central

Cumber, Jordi; Li, Claudia; Pound, Catherine M.; Fuller, Ann; Harrison, Denise

2013-01-01

Background. YouTube is an increasingly important medium for consumer health information – with content provided by healthcare professionals, government and non-government organizations, industry, and consumers themselves. It is a rapidly developing area of study for healthcare researchers. We examine the methods used in reviews of YouTube consumer health videos to identify trends and best practices. Methods and Materials. Published reviews of consumer-oriented health-related YouTube videos were identified through PubMed. Data extracted from these studies included type of journal, topic, characteristics of the search, methods of review including number of reviewers and method to achieve consensus between reviewers, inclusion and exclusion criteria, characteristics of the videos reported, ethical oversight, and follow-up. Results. Thirty-three studies were identified. Most were recent and published in specialty journals. Typically, these included more than 100 videos, and were examined by multiple reviewers. Most studies described characteristics of the videos, number of views, and sometime characteristics of the viewers. Accuracy of portrayal of the health issue under consideration was a common focus. Conclusion. Optimal transparency and reproducibility of studies of YouTube health-related videos can be achieved by following guidance designed for systematic review reporting, with attention to several elements specific to the video medium. Particularly when seeking to replicate consumer viewing behavior, investigators should consider the method used to select search terms, and use a snowballing rather than a sequential screening approach. Discontinuation protocols for online screening of relevance ranked search results is an area identified for further development. PMID:24058879

Use of systematic reviews in clinical practice guidelines: case study of smoking cessation

PubMed Central

Silagy, C A; Stead, L F; Lancaster, T

2001-01-01

Objective To examine the extent to which recommendations in the national guidelines for the cessation of smoking are based on evidence from systematic reviews of controlled trials. Design Retrospective analysis of recommendations for the national guidelines for the cessation of smoking. Materials National guidelines in clinical practice on smoking cessation published in English. Main outcome measures The type of evidence (systematic review of controlled trials, individual trials, other studies, expert opinion) used to support each recommendation. We also assessed whether a Cochrane systematic review was available and could have been used in formulating the recommendation. Results Four national smoking cessation guidelines (from Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States) covering 105 recommendations were identified. An explicit evidence base for 100%, 89%, 68%, and 98% of recommendations, respectively, was detected, of which 60%, 56%, 59%, and 47% were based on systematic reviews of controlled studies. Cochrane systematic reviews could have been used to develop between 39% and 73% of recommendations but were actually used in 0% to 36% of recommendations. The UK guidelines had the highest proportion of recommendations based on Cochrane systematic reviews. Conclusions Use of systematic reviews in guidelines is a measure of the “payback” on investment in research synthesis. Systematic reviews commonly underpinned recommendations in guidelines on smoking cessation. The extent to which they were used varied by country and there was evidence of duplication of effort in some areas. Greater international collaboration in developing and maintaining an evidence base of systematic reviews can improve the efficiency of use of research resources. PMID:11597966

Antibiotic prophylaxis in orthognathic surgery: A complex systematic review

PubMed Central

Hultin, Margareta; Klinge, Anna; Klinge, Björn; Tranæus, Sofia; Lund, Bodil

2018-01-01

Objective In orthognathic surgery, antibiotics are prescribed to reduce the risk of postoperative infection. However, there is lack of consensus over the appropriate drug, the dose and duration of administration. The aim of this complex systematic review was to assess the effect of antibiotics on postoperative infections in orthognathic surgery. Methods Both systematic reviews and primary studies were assessed. Medline (OVID), The Cochrane Library (Wiley) and EMBASE (embase.com), PubMed (non-indexed articles) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publications were searched. The primary studies were assessed using GRADE and the systematic reviews by AMSTAR. Results Screening of abstracts yielded 6 systematic reviews and 36 primary studies warranting full text scrutiny. In total,14 primary studies were assessed for risk of bias. Assessment of the included systematic reviews identified two studies with a moderate risk of bias, due to inclusion in the meta-analyses of primary studies with a high risk of bias. Quality assessment of the primary studies disclosed one with a moderate risk of bias and one with a low risk. The former compared a single dose of antibiotic with 24 hour prophylaxis using the same antibiotic; the latter compared oral and intravenous administration of antibiotics. Given the limited number of acceptable studies, no statistical analysis was undertaken, as it was unlikely to contribute any relevant information. Conclusion With respect to antibiotic prophylaxis in orthognathic surgery, most of the studies to date have been poorly conducted and reported. Thus scientific uncertainty remains as to the preferred antibiotic and the optimal duration of administration. PMID:29385159

A systematic map of systematic reviews in pediatric dentistry--what do we really know?

PubMed

Mejàre, Ingegerd A; Klingberg, Gunilla; Mowafi, Frida K; Stecksén-Blicks, Christina; Twetman, Svante H A; Tranæus, Sofia H

2015-01-01

To identify, appraise and summarize existing knowledge and knowledge gaps in practice-relevant questions in pediatric dentistry. A systematic mapping of systematic reviews was undertaken for domains considered important in daily clinical practice. The literature search covered questions in the following domains: behavior management problems/dental anxiety; caries risk assessment and caries detection including radiographic technologies; prevention and non-operative treatment of caries in primary and young permanent teeth; operative treatment of caries in primary and young permanent teeth; prevention and treatment of periodontal disease; management of tooth developmental and mineralization disturbances; prevention and treatment of oral conditions in children with chronic diseases/developmental disturbances/obesity; diagnosis, prevention and treatment of dental erosion and tooth wear; treatment of traumatic injuries in primary and young permanent teeth and cost-effectiveness of these interventions. Abstracts and full text reviews were assessed independently by two reviewers and any differences were solved by consensus. AMSTAR was used to assess the risk of bias of each included systematic review. Reviews judged as having a low or moderate risk of bias were used to formulate existing knowledge and knowledge gaps. Out of 81 systematic reviews meeting the inclusion criteria, 38 were judged to have a low or moderate risk of bias. Half of them concerned caries prevention. The quality of evidence was high for a caries-preventive effect of daily use of fluoride toothpaste and moderate for fissure sealing with resin-based materials. For the rest the quality of evidence for the effects of interventions was low or very low. There is an urgent need for primary clinical research of good quality in most clinically-relevant domains in pediatric dentistry.

Telemedicine security: a systematic review.

PubMed

Garg, Vaibhav; Brewer, Jeffrey

2011-05-01

Telemedicine is a technology-based alternative to traditional health care delivery. However, poor security measures in telemedicine services can have an adverse impact on the quality of care provided, regardless of the chronic condition being studied. We undertook a systematic review of 58 journal articles pertaining to telemedicine security. These articles were selected based on a keyword search on 14 relevant journals. The articles were coded to evaluate the methodology and to identify the key areas of research in security that are being reviewed. Seventy-six percent of the articles defined the security problem they were addressing, and only 47% formulated a research question pertaining to security. Sixty-one percent proposed a solution, and 20% of these tested the security solutions that they proposed. Prior research indicates inadequate reporting of methodology in telemedicine research. We found that to be true for security research as well. We also identified other issues such as using outdated security standards. © 2011 Diabetes Technology Society.

Telemedicine Security: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Garg, Vaibhav; Brewer, Jeffrey

2011-01-01

Telemedicine is a technology-based alternative to traditional health care delivery. However, poor security measures in telemedicine services can have an adverse impact on the quality of care provided, regardless of the chronic condition being studied. We undertook a systematic review of 58 journal articles pertaining to telemedicine security. These articles were selected based on a keyword search on 14 relevant journals. The articles were coded to evaluate the methodology and to identify the key areas of research in security that are being reviewed. Seventy-six percent of the articles defined the security problem they were addressing, and only 47% formulated a research question pertaining to security. Sixty-one percent proposed a solution, and 20% of these tested the security solutions that they proposed. Prior research indicates inadequate reporting of methodology in telemedicine research. We found that to be true for security research as well. We also identified other issues such as using outdated security standards. PMID:21722592

Systematic Review Methodology in Higher Education

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bearman, Margaret; Smith, Calvin D.; Carbone, Angela; Slade, Susan; Baik, Chi; Hughes-Warrington, Marnie; Neumann, David L.

2012-01-01

Systematic review methodology can be distinguished from narrative reviews of the literature through its emphasis on transparent, structured and comprehensive approaches to searching the literature and its requirement for formal synthesis of research findings. There appears to be relatively little use of the systematic review methodology within the…

Systematic review and meta-analysis: tools for the information age.

PubMed

Weatherall, Mark

2017-11-01

The amount of available biomedical information is vast and growing. Natural limitations of the way clinicians and researchers approach this treasure trove of information comprise difficulties locating the information, and once located, cognitive biases may lead to inappropriate use of the information. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses represent important tools in the information age to improve knowledge and action. Systematic reviews represent a census approach to identifying literature to avoid non-response bias. They are a necessary prelude to producing combined quantitative summaries of associations or treatment effects. Meta-analysis comprises the arithmetical techniques for producing combined summaries from individual study reports. Careful, thoughtful and rigorous use of these tools is likely to enhance knowledge and action. Use of standard guidelines, such as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, or embedding these activities within collaborative groups such as the Cochrane Collaboration, are likely to lead to more useful systematic review and meta-analysis reporting. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Can Systematic Reviews Inform GMO Risk Assessment and Risk Management?

PubMed

Kohl, Christian; Frampton, Geoff; Sweet, Jeremy; Spök, Armin; Haddaway, Neal Robert; Wilhelm, Ralf; Unger, Stefan; Schiemann, Joachim

2015-01-01

Systematic reviews represent powerful tools to identify, collect, synthesize, and evaluate primary research data on specific research questions in a highly standardized and reproducible manner. They enable the defensible synthesis of outcomes by increasing precision and minimizing bias whilst ensuring transparency of the methods used. This makes them especially valuable to inform evidence-based risk analysis and decision making in various topics and research disciplines. Although seen as a "gold standard" for synthesizing primary research data, systematic reviews are not without limitations as they are often cost, labor and time intensive and the utility of synthesis outcomes depends upon the availability of sufficient and robust primary research data. In this paper, we (1) consider the added value systematic reviews could provide when synthesizing primary research data on genetically modified organisms (GMO) and (2) critically assess the adequacy and feasibility of systematic review for collating and analyzing data on potential impacts of GMOs in order to better inform specific steps within GMO risk assessment and risk management. The regulatory framework of the EU is used as an example, although the issues we discuss are likely to be more widely applicable.

Can Systematic Reviews Inform GMO Risk Assessment and Risk Management?

PubMed Central

Kohl, Christian; Frampton, Geoff; Sweet, Jeremy; Spök, Armin; Haddaway, Neal Robert; Wilhelm, Ralf; Unger, Stefan; Schiemann, Joachim

2015-01-01

Systematic reviews represent powerful tools to identify, collect, synthesize, and evaluate primary research data on specific research questions in a highly standardized and reproducible manner. They enable the defensible synthesis of outcomes by increasing precision and minimizing bias whilst ensuring transparency of the methods used. This makes them especially valuable to inform evidence-based risk analysis and decision making in various topics and research disciplines. Although seen as a “gold standard” for synthesizing primary research data, systematic reviews are not without limitations as they are often cost, labor and time intensive and the utility of synthesis outcomes depends upon the availability of sufficient and robust primary research data. In this paper, we (1) consider the added value systematic reviews could provide when synthesizing primary research data on genetically modified organisms (GMO) and (2) critically assess the adequacy and feasibility of systematic review for collating and analyzing data on potential impacts of GMOs in order to better inform specific steps within GMO risk assessment and risk management. The regulatory framework of the EU is used as an example, although the issues we discuss are likely to be more widely applicable. PMID:26322307

How do authors of systematic reviews deal with research malpractice and misconduct in original studies? A cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors.

PubMed

Elia, Nadia; von Elm, Erik; Chatagner, Alexandra; Pöpping, Daniel M; Tramèr, Martin R

2016-03-02

To study whether systematic reviewers apply procedures to counter-balance some common forms of research malpractice such as not publishing completed research, duplicate publications, or selective reporting of outcomes, and to see whether they identify and report misconduct. Cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors. 118 systematic reviews published in four journals (Ann Int Med, BMJ, JAMA, Lancet), and the Cochrane Library, in 2013. Number (%) of reviews that applied procedures to reduce the impact of: (1) publication bias (through searching of unpublished trials), (2) selective outcome reporting (by contacting the authors of the original studies), (3) duplicate publications, (4) sponsors' and (5) authors' conflicts of interest, on the conclusions of the review, and (6) looked for ethical approval of the studies. Number (%) of reviewers who suspected misconduct are reported. The procedures applied were compared across journals. 80 (68%) reviewers confirmed their data. 59 (50%) reviews applied three or more procedures; 11 (9%) applied none. Unpublished trials were searched in 79 (66%) reviews. Authors of original studies were contacted in 73 (62%). Duplicate publications were searched in 81 (69%). 27 reviews (23%) reported sponsors of the included studies; 6 (5%) analysed their impact on the conclusions of the review. Five reviews (4%) looked at conflicts of interest of study authors; none of them analysed their impact. Three reviews (2.5%) looked at ethical approval of the studies. Seven reviews (6%) suspected misconduct; only 2 (2%) reported it explicitly. Procedures applied differed across the journals. Only half of the systematic reviews applied three or more of the six procedures examined. Sponsors, conflicts of interest of authors and ethical approval remain overlooked. Research misconduct is sometimes identified, but rarely reported. Guidance on when, and how, to report suspected misconduct is needed. Published by the BMJ

A systematic review of studies identifying predictors of poor return to work outcomes following workplace injury.

PubMed

Street, Tamara D; Lacey, Sarah J

2015-06-05

Injuries occurring in the workplace can have serious implications for the health of the individual, the productivity of the employer and the overall economic community. The objective of this paper is to increase the current state of understanding of individual demographic and psychosocial characteristics associated with extended absenteeism from the workforce due to a workplace injury. Studies included in this systematic literature review tracked participants' return to work status over a minimum of three months, identified either demographic, psychosocial or general injury predictors of poor return to work outcomes and included a heterogeneous sample of workplace injuries. Identified predictors of poor return to work outcomes included older age, female gender, divorced marital status, two or more dependent family members, lower education levels, employment variables associated with reduced labour market desirability, severity or sensitive injury locations, negative attitudes and outcome perceptions of the participant. There is a need for clear and consistent definition and measurement of return to work outcomes and a holistic theoretical model integrating injury, psychosocial and demographic predictors of return to work. Through greater understanding of the nature of factors affecting return to work, improved outcomes could be achieved.

Disasters and Perinatal Health: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Harville, EW; Xiong, X; Buekens, P

2012-01-01

Background The empirical literature on the effects of disaster on pregnancy and the postpartum period is limited. The objective of this review was to examine the existing evidence on the effect of disasters on perinatal health. Methods A systematic review was conducted by searching electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cinahl, PsycInfo), including literature on disasters and pregnancy outcomes (e.g., preterm birth, low birthweight, congenital anomalies), mental health, and child development. 110 articles were identified, but many published reports were anecdotes or recommendations rather than systematic studies. The final review included 49 peer-reviewed studies that met inclusion criteria. Results Studies addressing the World Trade Center disaster of September 11th and other terrorist attacks, environmental/chemical disasters, and natural disasters such as hurricanes and earthquakes were identified. Disasters of various types may reduce fetal growth in some women, though there does not appear to be an effect on gestational age at birth. Severity of exposure is the major predictor of mental health issues among pregnant and postpartum women. The mother's mental health after a disaster may more strongly influence on child development than any direct effect of disaster-related prenatal stress. Conclusions There is evidence that disaster impacts maternal mental health and some perinatal health outcomes, particular among highly-exposed women. Future research should focus on under-studied outcomes such as spontaneous abortion. Relief workers and clinicians should concentrate on the most exposed women, particularly with respect to mental health. PMID:21375788

A systematic review of creative thinking/creativity in nursing education.

PubMed

Chan, Zenobia C Y

2013-11-01

This systematic review aimed to identify the types of nursing course structure that promotes students' creative thinking and creativity. Systematic review. Five electronic databases: The British Nursing Index, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus and Ovid Medline. The databases were systematically searched to identify studies that discussed the concept of creative thinking in nursing education or reported a strategy that improved students' creative thinking. Qualitative studies or studies that included qualitative data were included. After reading the full content of the included studies, key themes and concepts were extracted and synthesized. Eight studies were identified. Four main themes relating to the course structure in teaching creativity were developed: diversity learning, freedom to learn, learning with confidence and learning through group work. To promote creative thinking in nursing students, educators themselves need to be creative in designing courses that allow students to learn actively and convert thoughts into actions. Educators should balance course freedom and guidance to allow students to develop constructive and useful ideas. Confidence and group work may play significant roles in helping students to express themselves and think creatively. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Grey Literature Searching for Health Sciences Systematic Reviews: A Prospective Study of Time Spent and Resources Utilized.

PubMed

Saleh, Ahlam A; Ratajeski, Melissa A; Bertolet, Marnie

To identify estimates of time taken to search grey literature in support of health sciences systematic reviews and to identify searcher or systematic review characteristics that may impact resource selection or time spent searching. A survey was electronically distributed to searchers embarking on a new systematic review. Characteristics of the searcher and systematic review were collected along with time spent searching and what resources were searched. Time and resources were tabulated and resources were categorized as grey or non-grey. Data was analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis tests. Out of 81 original respondents, 21% followed through with completion of the surveys in their entirety. The median time spent searching all resources was 471 minutes, and of those a median of 85 minutes were spent searching grey literature. The median number of resources used in a systematic review search was four and the median number of grey literature sources searched was two. The amount of time spent searching was influenced by whether the systematic review was grant funded. Additionally, the number of resources searched was impacted by institution type and whether systematic review training was received. This study characterized the amount of time for conducting systematic review searches including searching the grey literature, in addition to the number and types of resources used. This may aid searchers in planning their time, along with providing benchmark information for future studies. This paper contributes by quantifying current grey literature search patterns and associating them with searcher and review characteristics. Further discussion and research into the search approach for grey literature in support of systematic reviews is encouraged.

Cycling with an amputation: A systematic review.

PubMed

Dyer, Bryce

2016-10-01

Cycling with any form of limb amputation has progressed from an activity of leisure or rehabilitation to elite level competition as part of the Paralympic Games programme. While it is often proposed that research into sport with an amputation can be extremely limited, this study intended to identify the volume, type and historical strategy in this area. This study comprises a documented systematic literature review of cycling undertaken with any form of limb amputation. This study used four online search engines to identify relevant peer-reviewed literature. These included SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Scopus and MEDLINE. Google Scholar was also used as a secondary source. The initial results were then subjected to a set of pre-defined inclusion criteria. The resulting publications were then analysed for content and thematic commonality. The review identified 20 articles which met pre-defined inclusion criteria. The identified peer-reviewed publications were dated from the period 2004 to 2014. Three clear themes emerged from the historical research. There was both a paucity of peer-reviewed literature with respect to cycling with an amputation and the design of adaptive or assistive technology to replace limb loss. However, publications have been rising substantially over the last 5 years. This review study established the historical strategy and content of cycling with an amputation and identified the existing research themes. This will assist in summarising the current level of knowledge and help signpost such work in the future. © The International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics 2015.

Child maltreatment prevention: a systematic review of reviews.

PubMed

Mikton, Christopher; Butchart, Alexander

2009-05-01

To synthesize recent evidence from systematic and comprehensive reviews on the effectiveness of universal and selective child maltreatment prevention interventions, evaluate the methodological quality of the reviews and outcome evaluation studies they are based on, and map the geographical distribution of the evidence. A systematic review of reviews was conducted. The quality of the systematic reviews was evaluated with a tool for the assessment of multiple systematic reviews (AMSTAR), and the quality of the outcome evaluations was assessed using indicators of internal validity and of the construct validity of outcome measures. The review focused on seven main types of interventions: home visiting, parent education, child sex abuse prevention, abusive head trauma prevention, multi-component interventions, media-based interventions, and support and mutual aid groups. Four of the seven - home-visiting, parent education, abusive head trauma prevention and multi-component interventions - show promise in preventing actual child maltreatment. Three of them - home visiting, parent education and child sexual abuse prevention - appear effective in reducing risk factors for child maltreatment, although these conclusions are tentative due to the methodological shortcomings of the reviews and outcome evaluation studies they draw on. An analysis of the geographical distribution of the evidence shows that outcome evaluations of child maltreatment prevention interventions are exceedingly rare in low- and middle-income countries and make up only 0.6% of the total evidence base. Evidence for the effectiveness of four of the seven main types of interventions for preventing child maltreatment is promising, although it is weakened by methodological problems and paucity of outcome evaluations from low- and middle-income countries.

Reporting and Handling Missing Outcome Data in Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Cochrane Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Spineli, Loukia M.; Pandis, Nikolaos; Salanti, Georgia

2015-01-01

Objectives: The purpose of the study was to provide empirical evidence about the reporting of methodology to address missing outcome data and the acknowledgement of their impact in Cochrane systematic reviews in the mental health field. Methods: Systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews after January 1, 2009 by…

Conducting systematic reviews of association (etiology): The Joanna Briggs Institute's approach.

PubMed

Moola, Sandeep; Munn, Zachary; Sears, Kim; Sfetcu, Raluca; Currie, Marian; Lisy, Karolina; Tufanaru, Catalin; Qureshi, Rubab; Mattis, Patrick; Mu, Peifan

2015-09-01

The systematic review of evidence is the research method which underpins the traditional approach to evidence-based healthcare. There is currently no uniform methodology for conducting a systematic review of association (etiology). This study outlines and describes the Joanna Briggs Institute's approach and guidance for synthesizing evidence related to association with a predominant focus on etiology and contributes to the emerging field of systematic review methodologies. It should be noted that questions of association typically address etiological or prognostic issues.The systematic review of studies to answer questions of etiology follows the same basic principles of systematic review of other types of data. An a priori protocol must inform the conduct of the systematic review, comprehensive searching must be performed and critical appraisal of retrieved studies must be carried out.The overarching objective of systematic reviews of etiology is to identify and synthesize the best available evidence on the factors of interest that are associated with a particular disease or outcome. The traditional PICO (population, interventions, comparators and outcomes) format for systematic reviews of effects does not align with questions relating to etiology. A systematic review of etiology should include the following aspects: population, exposure of interest (independent variable) and outcome (dependent variable).Studies of etiology are predominantly explanatory or predictive. The objective of reviews of explanatory or predictive studies is to contribute to, and improve our understanding of, the relationship of health-related events or outcomes by examining the association between variables. When interpreting possible associations between variables based on observational study data, caution must be exercised due to the likely presence of confounding variables or moderators that may impact on the results.As with all systematic reviews, there are various approaches to

Evaluation of Role of Myofibroblasts in Oral Cancer: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Sekhon, Harjeet K; Sircar, Keya; Kaur, Gurbani; Marwah, Muneet

2016-01-01

To conduct a systematic review on the role of myofibroblasts in progression of oral cancer. The myofibroblast is essential for the integrity of the mammalian body by virtue of its role in wound healing, but it also plays a negative role due to their role in promoting tumor development. Systematic review. Bibliographic searches were conducted in several electronic databases using all publications in PubMed, PubMed central, EMBASE, CancerLit, Google scholar, and Cochrane CCTR between 1990 and June 2015. The search of all publications from various electronic databases revealed 1,371 citations. The total number of studies considered for systematic review was 43. The total number of patients included in the studies was 990. Myofibroblasts are a significant component in stroma of oral cancer cases, though not identified in all cases. This systematic review shows that clinical, pathological, and immunohistochemistry tests have correlated the presence of high myofibroblast count in oral cancer cell stroma. Myofibroblasts play a significant role in oral cancer invasion and progression. Various studies have demonstrated their association with oral cancer. This review tends to highlight their role in the pathogenesis of oral cancer over the decade. Sekhon HK, Sircar K, Kaur G, Marwah M. Evaluation of Role of Myofibroblasts in Oral Cancer: A Systematic Review. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9(3):233-239.

Using systematic reviews to inform NIHR HTA trial planning and design: a retrospective cohort.

PubMed

Bhurke, Sheetal; Cook, Andrew; Tallant, Anna; Young, Amanda; Williams, Elaine; Raftery, James

2015-12-29

Chalmers and Glasziou's paper published in 2014 recommends research funding bodies should mandate that proposals for additional primary research are built on systematic reviews of existing evidence showing what is already known. Jones et al. identified 11 (23%) of 48 trials funded during 2006-8 by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) Programme did not reference a systematic review. This study did not explore the reasons for trials not referencing a systematic review or consider trials using any other evidence in the absence of a systematic review. Referencing a systematic review may not be possible in certain circumstances, for instance if the systematic review does not address the question being proposed in the trial. The current study extended Jones' study by exploring the reasons for why trials did not reference a systematic review and included a more recent cohort of trials funded in 2013 to determine if there were any changes in the referencing or use of systematic reviews. Two cohorts of NIHR HTA randomised controlled trials were included. Cohort I included the same trials as Jones et al. (with the exception of one trial which was discontinued). Cohort II included NIHR HTA trials funded in 2013. Data extraction was undertaken independently by two reviewers using full applications and trial protocols. Descriptive statistics was used and no formal statistical analyses were conducted. Five (11%) trials of the 47 funded during 2006-2008 did not reference a systematic review. These 5 trials had warranted reasons for not referencing systematic reviews. All trials from Cohort II referenced a systematic review. A quarter of all those trials with a preceding systematic review used a different primary outcome than those stated in the reviews. The NIHR requires that proposals for new primary research are justified by existing evidence and the findings of this study confirm the adherence to this requirement with a high rate

Economic interventions to improve population health: a scoping study of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Khan, Mishal S; Guan, Bernie Y; Audimulam, Jananie; Cervero Liceras, Francisco; Coker, Richard J; Yoong, Joanne

2016-07-07

Recognizing the close relationship between poverty and health, national program managers, policy-makers and donors are increasingly including economic interventions as part of their core strategies to improve population health. However, there is often confusion among stakeholders about the definitions and operational differences between distinct types of economic interventions and financial instruments, which can lead to important differences in interpretation and expectations. We conducted a scoping study to define and clarify concepts underlying key economic interventions - price interventions (taxes and subsidies), income transfer programs, incentive programs, livelihood support programs and health-related financial services - and map the evidence currently available from systematic reviews. We identified 195 systematic reviews on economic interventions published between 2005 and July 2015. Overall, there was an increase in the number of reviews published after 2010. The majority of reviews focused on price interventions, income transfer programs and incentive programs, with much less evidence available from systematic reviews on livelihood support programs and health-related financial services. We also identified a lack of evidence on: health outcomes in low income countries; unintended or perverse outcomes; implementation challenges; scalability and cost-effectiveness of economic interventions. We conclude that while more research is clearly needed to assess suitability and effectiveness of economic interventions in different contexts, before interventions are tested and further systematic reviews conducted, a consistent and accurate understanding of the fundamental differences in terminology and approaches is essential among researchers, public health policy makers and program planners.

Systematic reviews on child welfare services: identifying and disseminating the evidence.

PubMed

Kornør, Hege; Bergman, Hanna; Maayan, Nicola; Soares-Weiser, Karla; Bjørndal, Arild

2015-10-01

Evidence-based practice is at an early stage of uptake within child welfare services. To facilitate well-informed decisions, we disseminated evidence from systematic reviews (SR) to local child welfare stakeholders in Norway through plain language summaries on a website (http://www.r-bup.no). We developed and implemented our dissemination strategy through seven steps: (1) systematic literature search; (2) selection of relevant SRs; (3) assembly of an advisory board; (4) selection of child welfare SRs relevant to Norway; (5) prioritization of the included SRs; (6) development of a plain language summary (PLS) after feedback from the advisory board; and (7) implementation of website. A total of 9266 potentially relevant records were screened and 120 SRs were included. The advisory board was assembled from local policymakers, practitioners, researchers, carers and consumers. The advisory board members independently ranked the 120 SRs according to relevance and prioritized 20 SRs that were written up into the PLS. The format of the PLS was tested and agreed with the board members. A website was developed and the PLSs were published starting September 2014. We think that the PLSs will be valuable resources to practitioners and it will be easily accessible to caregivers and consumers. This knowledge will inform research priorities and practice in Norway, leading the way to the use of evidence-based decisions in local child welfare services. © 2015 The Authors. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Preventing gender-based violence victimization in adolescent girls in lower-income countries: Systematic review of reviews.

PubMed

Yount, Kathryn M; Krause, Kathleen H; Miedema, Stephanie S

2017-11-01

This systematic review of reviews synthesizes evidence on the impact of interventions to prevent violence against adolescent girls and young women 10-24 years (VAWG) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Theories of women's empowerment and the social ecology of multifaceted violence frame the review. Child abuse, female genital mutilation/cutting (FGMC), child marriage, intimate partner violence (IPV), and sexual violence were focal outcomes. Our review followed the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) for the systematic review of reviews, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) for a systematic review of recent intervention studies. Of 35 reviews identified between June 7 and July 20, 2016, 18 were non-duplicate systematic reviews of medium-to-high quality. Half of these 18 reviews focused on interventions to prevent IPV. Only four focused on adolescents, of which three focused on child marriage and one compared findings across early and late adolescence. None focused on interventions to prevent child abuse or sexual violence in adolescent/young women. From these 18 reviews and the supplemental systematic review of intervention studies, data were extracted on 34 experimental or quasi-experimental intervention studies describing 28 interventions. Almost all intervention studies measured impacts on one form of VAWG. Most studies assessed impacts on child marriage (n = 13), then IPV (n = 8), sexual violence (n = 4), child abuse (n = 3), and FGMC (n = 3). Interventions included 1-6 components, involving skills to enhance voice/agency (n = 17), social networks (n = 14), human resources like schooling (n = 10), economic incentives (n = 9), community engagement (n = 11) and community infrastructure development (n = 6). Bundled individual-level interventions and multilevel interventions had more favorable impacts on VAWG. Interventions involving community engagement, skill-building to

A Review of Cochrane Systematic Reviews of Interventions Relevant to Orthoptic Practice.

PubMed

Rowe, Fiona J; Elliott, Sue; Gordon, Iris; Shah, Anupa

2017-09-01

To present an overview of the range of systematic reviews on intervention trials pertinent to orthoptic practice, produced by the Cochrane Eyes and Vision group (CEV). We searched the 2016 Cochrane Library database (31.03.2016) to identify completed reviews and protocols of direct relevance to orthoptic practice. These reviews are currently completed and published, available on www.thecochranelibrary.com (free to UK health employees) or via the CEV website (http://eyes.cochrane.org/) . We found 27 completed CEV reviews across the topics of strabismus, amblyopia, refractive errors, and low vision. Seven completed CEV protocols addressed topics of strabismus, amblyopia, refractive errors, low vision, and screening. We found 3 completed Cochrane Stroke reviews addressing visual field loss, eye movement impairment, and age-related vision loss. The systematic review process presents an important opportunity for any clinician to contribute to the establishment of reliable, evidence-based orthoptic practice. Each review has an abstract and plain language summary that many non-clinicians find useful, followed by a full copy of the review (background, objectives, methods, results, discussion) with a conclusion section that is divided into implications for practice and implications for research. The current reviews provide patients/parents/carers with information about various different conditions and treatment options, but also provide clinicians with a summary of the available evidence on interventions, to use as a guide for both clinical practice and future research planning. The reviews identified in this overview highlight the evidence available for effective interventions for strabismus, amblyopia, refractive errors, and low vision or stroke rehabilitation as well as the gaps in the evidence base. Thus, a demand exists for future robust, randomized, controlled trials of such interventions of importance in orthoptic practice.

[Are Interventions Promoting Physical Activity Cost-Effective? A Systematic Review of Reviews].

PubMed

Rütten, Alfred; Abu-Omar, Karim; Burlacu, Ionut; Schätzlein, Valentin; Suhrcke, Marc

2017-03-01

On the basis of international published reviews, this systematic review aims to determine the health economic benefits of interventions promoting physical activity.This review of reviews is based on a systematic literature research in 10 databases (e. g. PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus) supplemented by hand searches from January 2000 to October 2015. Publications were considered in the English or German language only. Results of identified reviews were derived.In total, 18 reviews were identified that could be attributed to interventions promoting physical activity (2 reviews focusing on population-based physical activity interventions, 10 reviews on individual-based and 6 reviews on both population-based and individual-based physical activity interventions). Results showed that population-based physical activity interventions are of great health economic potential if reaching a wider population at comparably low costs. Outstanding are political and environmental strategies, as well as interventions supporting behavioural change through information. The most comprehensive documentation for interventions promoting physical activity could be found for individual-based strategies (i. e. exercise advice or exercise programs). However, such programs are comparatively less cost-effective due to limited reach and higher utilization of resources.The present study provides an extensive review and analysis of the current international state of research regarding the health economic evaluation of interventions promoting physical activity. Results show favourable cost-effectiveness for interventions promoting physical activity, though significant differences in the effectiveness between various interventions were noticed. The greatest potential for cost-effectiveness can be seen in population-based interventions. At the same time, there is a need to acknowledge the limitations of the economic evidence in this field which are attributable to methodological challenges and

Medical Cannabinoids in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Wong, Shane Shucheng; Wilens, Timothy E

2017-11-01

Legalization of medical marijuana in many states has led to a widening gap between the accessibility and the evidence for cannabinoids as a medical treatment. To systematically review published reports to identify the evidence base of cannabinoids as a medical treatment in children and adolescents. Based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a search of PubMed, Medline, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases was conducted in May 2017. Searching identified 2743 citations, and 103 full texts were reviewed. Searching identified 21 articles that met inclusion criteria, including 22 studies with a total sample of 795 participants. Five randomized controlled trials, 5 retrospective chart reviews, 5 case reports, 4 open-label trials, 2 parent surveys, and 1 case series were identified. Evidence for benefit was strongest for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, with increasing evidence of benefit for epilepsy. At this time, there is insufficient evidence to support use for spasticity, neuropathic pain, posttraumatic stress disorder, and Tourette syndrome. The methodological quality of studies varied, with the majority of studies lacking control groups, limited by small sample size, and not designed to test for the statistical significance of outcome measures. Studies were heterogeneous in the cannabinoid composition and dosage and lacked long-term follow-up to identify potential adverse effects. Additional research is needed to evaluate the potential role of medical cannabinoids in children and adolescents, especially given increasing accessibility from state legalization and potential psychiatric and neurocognitive adverse effects identified from studies of recreational cannabis use. Copyright © 2017 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Digital asthma self-management interventions: a systematic review.

PubMed

Morrison, Deborah; Wyke, Sally; Agur, Karolina; Cameron, Euan J; Docking, Robert I; Mackenzie, Alison M; McConnachie, Alex; Raghuvir, Vandana; Thomson, Neil C; Mair, Frances S

2014-02-18

Many people with asthma tolerate symptoms and lifestyle limitations unnecessarily by not utilizing proven therapies. Better support for self-management is known to improve asthma control, and increasingly the Internet and other digital media are being used to deliver that support. Our goal was to summarize current knowledge, evidenced through existing systematic reviews, of the effectiveness and implementation of digital self-management support for adults and children with asthma and to examine what features help or hinder the use of these programs. A comprehensive search strategy combined 3 facets of search terms: (1) online technology, (2) asthma, and (3) self-management/behavior change/patient experience. We undertook searches of 14 databases, and reference and citation searching. We included qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews about online or computerized interventions facilitating self-management. Title, abstract, full paper screening, and quality appraisal were performed by two researchers independently. Data extraction was undertaken using standardized forms. A total of 3810 unique papers were identified. Twenty-nine systematic reviews met inclusion criteria: the majority were from the United States (n=12), the rest from United Kingdom (n=6), Canada (n=3), Portugal (n=2), and Australia, France, Spain, Norway, Taiwan, and Greece (1 each). Only 10 systematic reviews fulfilled pre-determined quality standards, describing 19 clinical trials. Interventions were heterogeneous: duration of interventions ranging from single use, to 24-hour access for 12 months, and incorporating varying degrees of health professional involvement. Dropout rates ranged from 5-23%. Four RCTs were aimed at adults (overall range 3-65 years). Participants were inadequately described: socioeconomic status 0/19, ethnicity 6/19, and gender 15/19. No qualitative systematic reviews were included. Meta-analysis was not attempted due to heterogeneity and inadequate information

Anger Management and Intellectual Disabilities: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hamelin, Jeffery; Travis, Robert; Sturmey, Peter

2013-01-01

We conducted a systematic literature review of anger management in people with intellectual disabilities (ID). We identified 2 studies that used randomized controlled trials and 6 that used pretest-posttest nonequivalent control group designs. The mean between-group effect size was 1.52 for randomized controlled trials and 0.89 for the other…

Risk factors for first time incidence sciatica: a systematic review.

PubMed

Cook, Chad E; Taylor, Jeffrey; Wright, Alexis; Milosavljevic, Steven; Goode, Adam; Whitford, Maureen

2014-06-01

Characteristically, sciatica involves radiating leg pain that follows a dermatomal pattern along the distribution of the sciatic nerve. To our knowledge, there are no studies that have investigated risk factors associated with first time incidence sciatica. The purpose of the systematic review was to identify the longitudinal risk factors associated with first time incidence sciatica and to report incidence rates for the condition. For the purposes of this review, first time incidence sciatica was defined as either of the following: 1) no prior history of sciatica or 2) transition from a pain-free state to sciatica. Studies included subjects of any age from longitudinal, observational, cohort designs. The study was a systematic review. Eight of the 239 articles identified by electronic search strategies met the inclusion criteria. Risk factors and their respective effect estimates were reported using descriptive analysis and the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. Modifiable risk factors included smoking, obesity, occupational factors and health status. Non-modifiable factors included age, gender and social class. Incidence rates varied among the included studies, in part reflecting the variability in the operationalized definition of sciatica but ranged from <1% to 37%. A majority of the identified risk factors associated with first time sciatica are modifiable, suggesting the potential benefits of primary prevention. In addition, those risk factors are also associated with unhealthy lifestyles, which may function concomitantly toward the development of sciatica. Sciatica as a diagnosis is inconsistently defined among studies. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The benefits of health information exchange: an updated systematic review.

PubMed

Menachemi, Nir; Rahurkar, Saurabh; Harle, Christopher A; Vest, Joshua R

2018-04-28

Widespread health information exchange (HIE) is a national objective motivated by the promise of improved care and a reduction in costs. Previous reviews have found little rigorous evidence that HIE positively affects these anticipated benefits. However, early studies of HIE were methodologically limited. The purpose of the current study is to review the recent literature on the impact of HIE. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to conduct our systematic review. PubMed and Scopus databases were used to identify empirical articles that evaluated HIE in the context of a health care outcome. Our search strategy identified 24 articles that included 63 individual analyses. The majority of the studies were from the United States representing 9 states; and about 40% of the included analyses occurred in a handful of HIEs from the state of New York. Seven of the 24 studies used designs suitable for causal inference and all reported some beneficial effect from HIE; none reported adverse effects. The current systematic review found that studies with more rigorous designs all reported benefits from HIE. Such benefits include fewer duplicated procedures, reduced imaging, lower costs, and improved patient safety. We also found that studies evaluating community HIEs were more likely to find benefits than studies that evaluated enterprise HIEs or vendor-mediated exchanges. Overall, these finding bode well for the HIEs ability to deliver on anticipated improvements in care delivery and reduction in costs.

Surgical management of a suspicious adnexal mass: a systematic review.

PubMed

Covens, Allan L; Dodge, Jason E; Lacchetti, Christina; Elit, Laurie M; Le, Tien; Devries-Aboud, Michaela; Fung-Kee-Fung, Michael

2012-07-01

To systematically review the existing literature in order to determine the optimal recommended protocols for the surgical management of adnexal masses suspicious for apparent early stage malignancy. A review of all systematic reviews and guidelines published between 1999 and 2009 was conducted as a first step. After the identification of two systematic reviews on the topic, searches of MEDLINE for studies published since 2004 were also conducted to update and supplement the evidentiary base. The updated literature search identified 31 studies that met the inclusion criteria. A bivariate random effects analysis of 15 frozen section diagnosis studies yielded an overall sensitivity of 89.2% (95% CI, 86.3 to 91.5%) and specificity of 97.9% (95% CI, 96.6 to 98.7%). The surgical evidence suggests that systematic lymphadenectomy and proper surgical staging improve survival. Conservative fertility-preserving surgical approaches are an acceptable option in women with low malignant potential tumours. The accuracy and the adequacy of surgical staging by laparotomy or laparoscopic approaches appear to be comparable, with neither approach conferring a survival advantage. Intraoperative tumour rupture was indeed reported to occur more frequently in patients undergoing laparoscopy versus laparotomy in two retrospective cohort studies. The best available evidence was collected and included in this rigorous systematic review. The abundant evidentiary base provided the context and direction for the surgical management of adnexal masses suspicious for apparent early stage malignancy. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Measurement properties of patient reported outcome measures for spondyloarthritis: A systematic review.

PubMed

Png, Kelly; Kwan, Yu Heng; Leung, Ying Ying; Phang, Jie Kie; Lau, Jia Qi; Lim, Ka Keat; Chew, Eng Hui; Low, Lian Leng; Tan, Chuen Seng; Thumboo, Julian; Fong, Warren; Østbye, Truls

2018-03-21

This systematic review aimed to identify studies investigating measurement properties of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for spondyloarthritis (SpA), and to evaluate their methodological quality and level of evidence relating to the measurement properties of PROMs. This systematic review was guided by the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA). Articles published before 30 June 2017 were retrieved from PubMed ® , Embase ® , and PsychINFO ® (Ovid). Methodological quality and level of evidence were evaluated according to recommendations from the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). We identified 60 unique PROMs from 125 studies in 39 countries. Twenty-one PROMs were validated for two or more SpA subtypes. The literature examined hypothesis testing (82.4%) most frequently followed by reliability (60.0%). A percentage of 77.7% and 42.7% of studies that assessed PROMs for hypothesis testing and reliability, respectively had "fair" or better methodological quality. Among the PROMs identified, 41.7% were studied in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) only and 23.3% were studied in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) only. The more extensively assessed PROMs included the ankylosing spondylitis quality of life (ASQoL) and bath ankylosing spondylitis functional index (BASFI) for ankylosing spondylitis, and the psoriatic arthritis quality of life questionnaire (VITACORA-19) for psoriatic arthritis. This study identified 60 unique PROMs through a systematic review and synthesized evidence of the measurement properties of the PROMs. There is a lack of validation of PROMs for use across SpA subtypes. Future studies may consider validating PROMs for use across different SpA subtypes. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The evidence base for psychological interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review of reviews.

PubMed

Prothero, Louise; Barley, Elizabeth; Galloway, James; Georgopoulou, Sofia; Sturt, Jackie

2018-06-01

Psychological interventions are an important but often overlooked adjunctive treatment option for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Findings from systematic reviews of psychological interventions for this patient group are conflicting. A systematic review of reviews can explain inconsistencies between studies and provide a clearer understanding of the effects of interventions. To: 1) determine the effectiveness of psychological interventions in improving biopsychosocial outcomes for adults with rheumatoid arthritis, 2) determine the relationship between the intensity of the psychological interventions (number of sessions, duration of sessions, duration of intervention) on outcomes, and 3) assess the impact of comparator group (usual care, education only) on outcomes. We conducted a systematic review of reviews using the following inclusion criteria: 1) randomised controlled trials of psychological interventions (including cognitive behavioural therapy, supportive counselling, psychotherapy, self-regulatory techniques, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy and disclosure therapy) provided as an adjunct to medication, 2) included rheumatoid arthritis patients aged ≥ 18 years, 3) reported findings for at least 1 of the primary outcomes: pain, fatigue, psychological status, functional disability and disease activity and 4) were published in English between January 2000 and March 2015 (updated January 2018). We searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects. Reference lists were searched for additional reviews. Study selection and 50% of the quality assessments were performed by two independent reviewers. Methodological quality was measured using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews checklist. Data extraction was conducted by one reviewer using a predesigned data extraction form. Eight systematic reviews met inclusion criteria (one review was excluded due to

Optimal strategies to consider when peer reviewing a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PubMed

Moher, David

2015-11-02

Systematic reviews are popular. A recent estimate indicates that 11 new systematic reviews are published daily. Nevertheless, evidence indicates that the quality of reporting of systematic reviews is not optimal. One likely reason is that the authors' reports have received inadequate peer review. There are now many different types of systematic reviews and peer reviewing them can be enhanced by using a reporting guideline to supplement whatever template the journal editors have asked you, as a peer reviewer, to use. Additionally, keeping up with the current literature, whether as a content expert or being aware of advances in systematic review methods is likely be make for a more comprehensive and effective peer review. Providing a brief summary of what the systematic review has reported is an important first step in the peer review process (and not performed frequently enough). At its core, it provides the authors with some sense of what the peer reviewer believes was performed (Methods) and found (Results). Importantly, it also provides clarity regarding any potential problems in the methods, including statistical approaches for meta-analysis, results, and interpretation of the systematic review, for which the peer reviewer can seek explanations from the authors; these clarifications are best presented as questions to the authors.