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.

Methods for a Rapid Systematic Review and Metaanalysis in Evaluating Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors for Premature Ejaculation

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Martyn-St. James, Marrissa; Cooper, Katy; Kaltenthaler, Eva

2017-01-01

The aim of this study was to evaluate a rapid systematic review method in which randomised controlled trial (RCT) data was extracted from existing reviews and subsequent RCTs. The method enabled: identification of RCTs not included by existing reviews; cross-checking RCT data for consistency where there was more than one review; double data…

The quality of systematic reviews about interventions for refractive error can be improved: a review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Mayo-Wilson, Evan; Ng, Sueko Matsumura; Chuck, Roy S; Li, Tianjing

2017-09-05

Systematic reviews should inform American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) Preferred Practice Pattern® (PPP) guidelines. The quality of systematic reviews related to the forthcoming Preferred Practice Pattern® guideline (PPP) Refractive Errors & Refractive Surgery is unknown. We sought to identify reliable systematic reviews to assist the AAO Refractive Errors & Refractive Surgery PPP. Systematic reviews were eligible if they evaluated the effectiveness or safety of interventions included in the 2012 PPP Refractive Errors & Refractive Surgery. To identify potentially eligible systematic reviews, we searched the Cochrane Eyes and Vision United States Satellite database of systematic reviews. Two authors identified eligible reviews and abstracted information about the characteristics and quality of the reviews independently using the Systematic Review Data Repository. We classified systematic reviews as "reliable" when they (1) defined criteria for the selection of studies, (2) conducted comprehensive literature searches for eligible studies, (3) assessed the methodological quality (risk of bias) of the included studies, (4) used appropriate methods for meta-analyses (which we assessed only when meta-analyses were reported), (5) presented conclusions that were supported by the evidence provided in the review. We identified 124 systematic reviews related to refractive error; 39 met our eligibility criteria, of which we classified 11 to be reliable. Systematic reviews classified as unreliable did not define the criteria for selecting studies (5; 13%), did not assess methodological rigor (10; 26%), did not conduct comprehensive searches (17; 44%), or used inappropriate quantitative methods (3; 8%). The 11 reliable reviews were published between 2002 and 2016. They included 0 to 23 studies (median = 9) and analyzed 0 to 4696 participants (median = 666). Seven reliable reviews (64%) assessed surgical interventions. Most systematic reviews of interventions for refractive error are low methodological quality. Following widely accepted guidance, such as Cochrane or Institute of Medicine standards for conducting systematic reviews, would contribute to improved patient care and inform future research.

The Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Industrial and Organizational Psychology: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Schalken, Naomi; Rietbergen, Charlotte

2017-01-01

Objective: The goal of this systematic review was to examine the reporting quality of the method section of quantitative systematic reviews and meta-analyses from 2009 to 2016 in the field of industrial and organizational psychology with the help of the Meta-Analysis Reporting Standards (MARS), and to update previous research, such as the study of Aytug et al. (2012) and Dieckmann et al. (2009). Methods: A systematic search for quantitative systematic reviews and meta-analyses was conducted in the top 10 journals in the field of industrial and organizational psychology between January 2009 and April 2016. Data were extracted on study characteristics and items of the method section of MARS. A cross-classified multilevel model was analyzed, to test whether publication year and journal impact factor (JIF) were associated with the reporting quality scores of articles. Results: Compliance with MARS in the method section was generally inadequate in the random sample of 120 articles. Variation existed in the reporting of items. There were no significant effects of publication year and journal impact factor (JIF) on the reporting quality scores of articles. Conclusions: The reporting quality in the method section of systematic reviews and meta-analyses was still insufficient, therefore we recommend researchers to improve the reporting in their articles by using reporting standards like MARS. PMID:28878704

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 best estimates of effectiveness and, importantly, highlight areas of uncertainty that can be used in "sensitivity analysis". DISCUSSION: Systematic reviews are an important recent methodological advance, the potential for which has only begun to be realized in mental health. This use of systematic reviews is probably most advanced in producing critical summaries of clinical effectiveness data. Systematic reviews cannot produce valid and believable conclusions when the primary research literature is of poor quality. An important function of systematic reviews will be in highlighting this poor quality research which is of little use in mental health decision making. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH PROVISION: Health care provision should be both clinically and cost effective. Systematic reviews are a key component in ensuring that this goal is achieved. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: Systematic reviews have potential to inform health policy. Examples presented show that health policy is often made without due consideration of the research evidence. Systematic reviews can provide robust and believable answers, which can help inform rational decision-making. Importantly, systematic reviews can highlight the need for important primary research and can inform the design of this research such that it provides answers that will help in forming healthcare policy. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: Systematic reviews should precede costly (and often unnecessary) primary research. Many areas of health policy and practice have yet to be evaluated using systematic review methodology. Methods for the summarization of economic data are methodologically complex and deserve further research

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.

Quantitative Analysis of Qualitative Information from Interviews: A Systematic Literature Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Fakis, Apostolos; Hilliam, Rachel; Stoneley, Helen; Townend, Michael

2014-01-01

Background: A systematic literature review was conducted on mixed methods area. Objectives: The overall aim was to explore how qualitative information from interviews has been analyzed using quantitative methods. Methods: A contemporary review was undertaken and based on a predefined protocol. The references were identified using inclusion and…

Clarifying the abstracts of systematic literature reviews*

PubMed Central

Hartley, James

2000-01-01

Background: There is a small body of research on improving the clarity of abstracts in general that is relevant to improving the clarity of abstracts of systematic reviews. Objectives: To summarize this earlier research and indicate its implications for writing the abstracts of systematic reviews. Method: Literature review with commentary on three main features affecting the clarity of abstracts: their language, structure, and typographical presentation. Conclusions: The abstracts of systematic reviews should be easier to read than the abstracts of medical research articles, as they are targeted at a wider audience. The aims, methods, results, and conclusions of systematic reviews need to be presented in a consistent way to help search and retrieval. The typographic detailing of the abstracts (type-sizes, spacing, and weights) should be planned to help, rather than confuse, the reader. PMID:11055300

Potential value of systematic reviews of qualitative evidence in informing user-centered health and social care: findings from a descriptive overview.

PubMed

Dalton, Jane; Booth, Andrew; Noyes, Jane; Sowden, Amanda J

2017-08-01

Systematic reviews of quantitative evidence are well established in health and social care. Systematic reviews of qualitative evidence are increasingly available, but volume, topics covered, methods used, and reporting quality are largely unknown. We provide a descriptive overview of systematic reviews of qualitative evidence assessing health and social care interventions included on the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). We searched DARE for reviews published between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014. We extracted data on review content and methods, summarized narratively, and explored patterns over time. We identified 145 systematic reviews conducted worldwide (64 in the UK). Interventions varied but largely covered treatment or service delivery in community and hospital settings. There were no discernible patterns over time. Critical appraisal of primary studies was conducted routinely. Most reviews were poorly reported. Potential exists to use systematic reviews of qualitative evidence when driving forward user-centered health and social care. We identify where more research is needed and propose ways to improve review methodology and reporting. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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.

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.

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.

Introducing a Chair-Side Novel Approach to Reach Evidence-based Periodontal Information in the Daily Periodontal Practice

PubMed Central

Dannan, Aous

2009-01-01

Background Evidence-based healthcare is not an easier approach to patient management, but should provide both clinicians and patients with greater confidence and trust in their mutual relationship. The intellectual embrace of evidence-based methods, coupled with clinical expertise and consideration of the patients individual uniqueness and requirements, is needed for all periodontal therapists if optimum care is the goal. One important element of evidence-based decision making in periodontology is the systematic review. Systematic reviews usually provide the periodontist with the highest level of evidence which should be taken into consideration when constructing any treatment plan in the dental clinic. However, reaching systematic reviews might be a time-consuming procedure that needs further personal skills. Methods In this paper, a chair-side novel approach to facilitate the incorporation of systematic reviews into daily periodontal practice is presented. It is based on three simple tools, namely, a list of suitable periodontics-related key words, a data bank of all up-to-date published systematic reviews in periodontology, and hand-made paper sheets to match the key words with their related systematic review statements. Results and Conclusions A primary validation of this method indicated the simplicity in learning and application. Keywords Chair-side; Evidence-based medicine; Periodontology; Systematic review PMID:22461868

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 number and poor methodological quality of primary studies. The Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews provides a useful method of appraising the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Individual item scores, however, should be examined in addition to total scores, so that significant methodological flaws of systematic reviews are not missed, and results are interpreted appropriately. (348 words) PMID:23331384

A practical overview of how to conduct a systematic review.

PubMed

Davis, Dilla

2016-11-16

With an increasing focus on evidence-based practice in health care, it is important that nurses understand the principles underlying systematic reviews. Systematic reviews are used in healthcare to present a comprehensive, policy-neutral, transparent and reproducible synthesis of evidence. This article provides a practical overview of the process of undertaking systematic reviews, explaining the rationale for each stage. It provides guidance on the standard methods applicable to every systematic review: writing and registering a protocol; planning a review; searching and selecting studies; data collection; assessing the risk of bias; and interpreting results.

Methods for Documenting Systematic Review Searches: A Discussion of Common Issues

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Rader, Tamara; Mann, Mala; Stansfield, Claire; Cooper, Chris; Sampson, Margaret

2014-01-01

Introduction: As standardized reporting requirements for systematic reviews are being adopted more widely, review authors are under greater pressure to accurately record their search process. With careful planning, documentation to fulfill the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses requirements can become a valuable…

Does Consideration and Assessment of Effects on Health Equity Affect the Conclusions of Systematic Reviews? A Methodology Study

PubMed Central

Welch, Vivian; Petticrew, Mark; Ueffing, Erin; Benkhalti Jandu, Maria; Brand, Kevin; Dhaliwal, Bharbhoor; Kristjansson, Elizabeth; Smylie, Janet; Wells, George Anthony; Tugwell, Peter

2012-01-01

Introduction Tackling health inequities both within and between countries remains high on the agenda of international organizations including the World Health Organization and local, regional and national governments. Systematic reviews can be a useful tool to assess effects on equity in health status because they include studies conducted in a variety of settings and populations. This study aims to describe the extent to which the impacts of health interventions on equity in health status are considered in systematic reviews, describe methods used, and assess the implications of their equity related findings for policy, practice and research. Methods We conducted a methodology study of equity assessment in systematic reviews. Two independent reviewers extracted information on the reporting and analysis of impacts of health interventions on equity in health status in a group of 300 systematic reviews collected from all systematic reviews indexed in one month of MEDLINE, using a pre-tested data collection form. Any differences in data extraction were resolved by discussion. Results Of the 300 systematic reviews, 224 assessed the effectiveness of interventions on health outcomes. Of these 224 reviews, 29 systematic reviews assessed effects on equity in health status using subgroup analysis or targeted analyses of vulnerable populations. Of these, seven conducted subgroup analyses related to health equity which were reported in insufficient detail to judge their credibility. Of these 29 reviews, 18 described implications for policy and practice based on assessment of effects on health equity. Conclusion The quality and completeness of reporting should be enhanced as a priority, because without this policymakers and practitioners will continue lack the evidence base they need to inform decision-making about health inequity. Furthermore, there is a need to develop methods to systematically consider impacts on equity in health status that is currently lacking in systematic reviews. PMID:22427804

AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 7: PRISMA-CI elaboration and explanation.

PubMed

Guise, Jeanne-Marie; Butler, Mary; Chang, Christine; Viswanathan, Meera; Pigott, Terri; Tugwell, Peter

2017-10-01

Complex interventions are widely used in health care, public health, education, criminology, social work, business, and welfare. They have increasingly become the subject of systematic reviews and are challenging to effectively report. The Complex Interventions Methods Workgroup developed an extension to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Complex Interventions (PRISMA-CI). Following the EQUATOR Network guidance for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extensions, this Explanation and Elaboration (EE) document accompanies the PRISMA-CI checklist to promote consistency in reporting of systematic reviews of complex interventions. The EE document explains the meaning and rationale for each unique PRISMA-CI checklist item and provides examples to assist systematic review authors in operationalizing PRISMA-CI guidance. The Complex Interventions Workgroup developed PRISMA-CI as an important start toward increased consistency in reporting of systematic reviews of complex interventions. Because the field is rapidly expanding, the Complex Interventions Methods Workgroup plans to re-evaluate periodically for the need to add increasing specificity and examples as the field matures. Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Pruning and Prioritising: A Case Study of a Pragmatic Method for Managing a Rapid Systematic Review with Limited Resources

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Harnan, Sue Elizabeth; Cooper, Katy; Jones, Sarah Lynne; Jones, Elaine

2015-01-01

Full systematic reviews are time and resource heavy. We describe a method successfully used to produce a rapid review of yoga for health and wellbeing, with limited resources, using mapping methods. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed a priori and refined "post hoc," with the review team blind to the study results to minimise…

Reporting Quality of Search Methods in Systematic Reviews of HIV Behavioral Interventions (2000-2010): Are the Searches Clearly Explained, Systematic and Reproducible?

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Mullins, Mary M.; DeLuca, Julia B.; Crepaz, Nicole; Lyles, Cynthia M.

2014-01-01

Systematic reviews are an essential tool for researchers, prevention providers and policy makers who want to remain current with the evidence in the field. Systematic review must adhere to strict standards, as the results can provide a more objective appraisal of evidence for making scientific decisions than traditional narrative reviews. An…

Economics methods in Cochrane systematic reviews of health promotion and public health related interventions.

PubMed

Shemilt, Ian; Mugford, Miranda; Drummond, Michael; Eisenstein, Eric; Mallender, Jacqueline; McDaid, David; Vale, Luke; Walker, Damian

2006-11-15

Provision of evidence on costs alongside evidence on the effects of interventions can enhance the relevance of systematic reviews to decision-making. However, patterns of use of economics methods alongside systematic review remain unclear. Reviews of evidence on the effects of interventions are published by both the Cochrane and Campbell Collaborations. Although it is not a requirement that Cochrane or Campbell Reviews should consider economic aspects of interventions, many do. This study aims to explore and describe approaches to incorporating economics methods in a selection of Cochrane systematic reviews in the area of health promotion and public health, to help inform development of methodological guidance on economics for reviewers. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched using a search strategy for potential economic evaluation studies. We included current Cochrane reviews and review protocols retrieved using the search that are also identified as relevant to health promotion or public health topics. A reviewer extracted data which describe the economics components of included reviews. Extracted data were summarised in tables and analysed qualitatively. Twenty-one completed Cochrane reviews and seven review protocols met inclusion criteria. None incorporate formal economic evaluation methods. Ten completed reviews explicitly aim to incorporate economics studies and data. There is a lack of transparent reporting of methods underpinning the incorporation of economics studies and data. Some reviews are likely to exclude useful economics studies and data due to a failure to incorporate search strategies tailored to the retrieval of such data or use of key specialist databases, and application of inclusion criteria designed for effectiveness studies. There is a need for consistency and transparency in the reporting and conduct of the economics components of Cochrane reviews, as well as regular dialogue between Cochrane reviewers and economists to develop increased capacity for economic analyses alongside such reviews. Use of applicable economics methods in Cochrane reviews can help provide the international context within which economics data can be interpreted and assessed as a preliminary to full economic evaluation.

Including mixed methods research in systematic reviews: examples from qualitative syntheses in TB and malaria control.

PubMed

Atkins, Salla; Launiala, Annika; Kagaha, Alexander; Smith, Helen

2012-04-30

Health policy makers now have access to a greater number and variety of systematic reviews to inform different stages in the policy making process, including reviews of qualitative research. The inclusion of mixed methods studies in systematic reviews is increasing, but these studies pose particular challenges to methods of review. This article examines the quality of the reporting of mixed methods and qualitative-only studies. We used two completed systematic reviews to generate a sample of qualitative studies and mixed method studies in order to make an assessment of how the quality of reporting and rigor of qualitative-only studies compares with that of mixed-methods studies. Overall, the reporting of qualitative studies in our sample was consistently better when compared with the reporting of mixed methods studies. We found that mixed methods studies are less likely to provide a description of the research conduct or qualitative data analysis procedures and less likely to be judged credible or provide rich data and thick description compared with standalone qualitative studies. Our time-related analysis shows that for both types of study, papers published since 2003 are more likely to report on the study context, describe analysis procedures, and be judged credible and provide rich data. However, the reporting of other aspects of research conduct (i.e. descriptions of the research question, the sampling strategy, and data collection methods) in mixed methods studies does not appear to have improved over time. Mixed methods research makes an important contribution to health research in general, and could make a more substantial contribution to systematic reviews. Through our careful analysis of the quality of reporting of mixed methods and qualitative-only research, we have identified areas that deserve more attention in the conduct and reporting of mixed methods research.

Psychosocial Benefits of Cooking Interventions: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Farmer, Nicole; Touchton-Leonard, Katherine; Ross, Alyson

2018-01-01

Objectives: Cooking interventions are used in therapeutic and rehabilitative settings; however, little is known about the influence of these interventions on psychosocial outcomes. This systematic review examines the research evidence regarding the influence of cooking interventions on psychosocial outcomes. Methods: A systematic review of the…

Promoting Children's Health with Digital Games: A Review of Reviews.

PubMed

Parisod, Heidi; Pakarinen, Anni; Kauhanen, Lotta; Aromaa, Minna; Leppänen, Ville; Liukkonen, Tapani N; Smed, Jouni; Salanterä, Sanna

2014-06-01

Effective, evidence-based, and interesting methods are needed for children's health promotion. Digital games can be such a method, but there is need for a summary of the evidence on the effectiveness of digital games in promoting children's health. The aim of this review of reviews was to evaluate the quality of systematic reviews, to summarize the evidence in systematic reviews and reviews related to the effectiveness of digital games in children's health promotion, and to identify gaps in knowledge. A systematic literature search was conducted in May-August 2013 from relevant databases, and 1178 references were found. In total, 15 systematic reviews and reviews met the inclusion criteria. Most of the systematic reviews were found to be medium quality on the AMSTAR checklist. Most commonly, systematic reviews and reviews evaluated active videogames. According to the results, evidence of the highest level and quality seems to support an increase in physical activity to light to moderate levels and energy expenditure, especially when playing active videogames that require both upper and lower body movements. In addition, sedentary games were shown to have potential in children's health education, especially in supporting changes in asthma- and diabetes-related behavior and in dietary habits. However, there are still several gaps in the knowledge. There is a need for further high-quality systematic reviews and research in the field of health games.

Tutorial for writing systematic reviews for the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy (BJPT)

PubMed Central

Mancini, Marisa C.; Cardoso, Jefferson R.; Sampaio, Rosana F.; Costa, Lucíola C. M.; Cabral, Cristina M. N.; Costa, Leonardo O. P.

2014-01-01

Systematic reviews aim to summarize all evidence using very rigorous methods in order to address a specific research question with less bias as possible. Systematic reviews are widely used in the field of physical therapy, however not all reviews have good quality. This tutorial aims to guide authors of the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy on how systematic reviews should be conducted and reported in order to be accepted for publication. It is expected that this tutorial will help authors of systematic reviews as well as journal editors and reviewers on how to conduct, report, critically appraise and interpret this type of study design. PMID:25590440

Tutorial for writing systematic reviews for the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy (BJPT).

PubMed

Mancini, Marisa C; Cardoso, Jefferson R; Sampaio, Rosana F; Costa, Lucíola C M; Cabral, Cristina M N; Costa, Leonardo O P

2014-01-01

Systematic reviews aim to summarize all evidence using very rigorous methods in order to address a specific research question with less bias as possible. Systematic reviews are widely used in the field of physical therapy, however not all reviews have good quality. This tutorial aims to guide authors of the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy on how systematic reviews should be conducted and reported in order to be accepted for publication. It is expected that this tutorial will help authors of systematic reviews as well as journal editors and reviewers on how to conduct, report, critically appraise and interpret this type of study design.

Systematic review of systematic reviews for the management of urinary incontinence and promotion of continence using conservative behavioural approaches in older people in care homes.

PubMed

Roe, Brenda; Flanagan, Lisa; Maden, Michelle

2015-07-01

To synthesize evidence from systematic reviews on the management of urinary incontinence and promotion of continence using conservative/behavioural approaches in older people in care homes to inform clinical practice, guidelines and research. Incontinence is highly prevalent in older people in care home populations. Systematic review of systematic reviews with narrative synthesis. Electronic searches of published systematic reviews in English using MEDLINE and CINAHL with no date restrictions up to September 2013. Searches supplemented by hand searching and electronic searching of Cochrane Library and PROSPERO. PRISMA statement was followed, as were established methods for systematic review of systematic reviews. Five systematic reviews of high quality were included, three specific to intervention studies and two reviewed descriptive studies. Urinary incontinence was the primary outcome in three reviews with factors associated with the management of urinary incontinence the primary outcome for the other reviews. Toileting programmes, in particular prompted voiding, with use of incontinence pads are the main conservative behavioural approach for the management of incontinence and promotion of continence in this population with evidence of effectiveness in the short term. Evidence from associated factors; exercise, mobility, comorbidities, hydration, skin care, staff perspectives, policies and older people's experiences and preference are limited. The majority of evidence of effectiveness are from studies from one country which may or may not be transferable to other care home populations. Future international studies are warranted of complex combined interventions using mixed methods to provide evidence of effectiveness, context of implementation and economic evaluation. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

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 recommendation cited a reliable intervention systematic review. No reliable systematic review was identified for 20 treatment recommendations, highlighting areas of evidence gaps. For AMD, reliable systematic reviews exist for many treatment recommendations in the AAO PPPs and should be cited to support these recommendations. We also identified areas where no high-level evidence exists. Mapping clinical practice guidelines to existing systematic reviews is one way to highlight areas where evidence generation or evidence synthesis is either available or needed. Copyright © 2016 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

A Systematic Review of Conceptual Models and Methods Used in Research on Educational Leadership and Management in Arab Societies

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hammad, Waheed; Hallinger, Philip

2017-01-01

This review of research analyzed topics, conceptual models and research methods employed in 62 EDLM studies from Arab societies published between 2000 and 2016. Systematic review methods were used to identify relevant studies published in nine core international EDLM journals. Quantitative analyses identified patterns within this set of Arab…

Does consideration and assessment of effects on health equity affect the conclusions of systematic reviews? A methodology study.

PubMed

Welch, Vivian; Petticrew, Mark; Ueffing, Erin; Benkhalti Jandu, Maria; Brand, Kevin; Dhaliwal, Bharbhoor; Kristjansson, Elizabeth; Smylie, Janet; Wells, George Anthony; Tugwell, Peter

2012-01-01

Tackling health inequities both within and between countries remains high on the agenda of international organizations including the World Health Organization and local, regional and national governments. Systematic reviews can be a useful tool to assess effects on equity in health status because they include studies conducted in a variety of settings and populations. This study aims to describe the extent to which the impacts of health interventions on equity in health status are considered in systematic reviews, describe methods used, and assess the implications of their equity related findings for policy, practice and research. We conducted a methodology study of equity assessment in systematic reviews. Two independent reviewers extracted information on the reporting and analysis of impacts of health interventions on equity in health status in a group of 300 systematic reviews collected from all systematic reviews indexed in one month of MEDLINE, using a pre-tested data collection form. Any differences in data extraction were resolved by discussion. Of the 300 systematic reviews, 224 assessed the effectiveness of interventions on health outcomes. Of these 224 reviews, 29 systematic reviews assessed effects on equity in health status using subgroup analysis or targeted analyses of vulnerable populations. Of these, seven conducted subgroup analyses related to health equity which were reported in insufficient detail to judge their credibility. Of these 29 reviews, 18 described implications for policy and practice based on assessment of effects on health equity. The quality and completeness of reporting should be enhanced as a priority, because without this policymakers and practitioners will continue lack the evidence base they need to inform decision-making about health inequity. Furthermore, there is a need to develop methods to systematically consider impacts on equity in health status that is currently lacking in systematic reviews.

A scoping review of rapid review methods.

PubMed

Tricco, Andrea C; Antony, Jesmin; Zarin, Wasifa; Strifler, Lisa; Ghassemi, Marco; Ivory, John; Perrier, Laure; Hutton, Brian; Moher, David; Straus, Sharon E

2015-09-16

Rapid reviews are a form of knowledge synthesis in which components of the systematic review process are simplified or omitted to produce information in a timely manner. Although numerous centers are conducting rapid reviews internationally, few studies have examined the methodological characteristics of rapid reviews. We aimed to examine articles, books, and reports that evaluated, compared, used or described rapid reviews or methods through a scoping review. MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, internet websites of rapid review producers, and reference lists were searched to identify articles for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened literature search results and abstracted data from included studies. Descriptive analysis was conducted. We included 100 articles plus one companion report that were published between 1997 and 2013. The studies were categorized as 84 application papers, seven development papers, six impact papers, and four comparison papers (one was included in two categories). The rapid reviews were conducted between 1 and 12 months, predominantly in Europe (58 %) and North America (20 %). The included studies failed to report 6 % to 73 % of the specific systematic review steps examined. Fifty unique rapid review methods were identified; 16 methods occurred more than once. Streamlined methods that were used in the 82 rapid reviews included limiting the literature search to published literature (24 %) or one database (2 %), limiting inclusion criteria by date (68 %) or language (49 %), having one person screen and another verify or screen excluded studies (6 %), having one person abstract data and another verify (23 %), not conducting risk of bias/quality appraisal (7 %) or having only one reviewer conduct the quality appraisal (7 %), and presenting results as a narrative summary (78 %). Four case studies were identified that compared the results of rapid reviews to systematic reviews. Three studies found that the conclusions between rapid reviews and systematic reviews were congruent. Numerous rapid review approaches were identified and few were used consistently in the literature. Poor quality of reporting was observed. A prospective study comparing the results from rapid reviews to those obtained through systematic reviews is warranted.

The Internationalization of the Academic Library: A Systematic Review of 25 Years of Literature on International Students

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Click, Amanda B.; Wiley, Claire Walker; Houlihan, Meggan

2017-01-01

This study is a systematic review of the library and information science (LIS) literature related to international students and academic libraries. A systematic review involves the methodical collection and analysis of a body of literature and is growing in popularity in the LIS field. Three well-known LIS databases were systematically searched…

Systematic review to inform prevention and management of chronic disease for Indigenous Australians: overview and priorities.

PubMed

Gomersall, Judith Streak; Canuto, Karla; Aromataris, Edoardo; Braunack-Mayer, Annette; Brown, Alex

2016-02-01

To describe the main characteristics of systematic reviews addressing questions of chronic disease and related risk factors for Indigenous Australians. We searched databases for systematic reviews meeting inclusion criteria. Two reviewers assessed quality and extracted characteristics using pre-defined tools. We identified 14 systematic reviews. Seven synthesised evidence about health intervention effectiveness; four addressed chronic disease or risk factor prevalence; and six conducted critical appraisal as per current best practice. Only three reported steps to align the review with standards for ethical research with Indigenous Australians and/or capture Indigenous-specific knowledge. Most called for more high-quality research. Systematic review is an under-utilised method for gathering evidence to inform chronic disease prevention and management for Indigenous Australians. Relevance of future systematic reviews could be improved by: 1) aligning questions with community priorities as well as decision maker needs; 2) involvement of, and leadership by, Indigenous researchers with relevant cultural and contextual knowledge; iii) use of critical appraisal tools that include traditional risk of bias assessment criteria and criteria that reflect Indigenous standards of appropriate research. Systematic review method guidance, tools and reporting standards are required to ensure alignment with ethical obligations and promote rigor and relevance. © 2015 Public Health Association of Australia.

Broadening Public Participation in Systematic Reviews: A Case Example Involving Young People in Two Configurative Reviews

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Oliver, Kathryn; Rees, Rebecca; Brady, Louca-Mai; Kavanagh, Josephine; Oliver, Sandy; Thomas, James

2015-01-01

Background: Arguments supporting the involvement of users in research have even more weight when involving the public in systematic reviews of research. We aimed to explore the potential for public involvement in systematic reviews of observational and qualitative studies. Methods: Two consultative workshops were carried out with a group of young…

Association between use of systematic reviews and national policy recommendations on screening newborn babies for rare diseases: systematic review and meta-analysis.

PubMed

Taylor-Phillips, Sian; Stinton, Chris; Ferrante di Ruffano, Lavinia; Seedat, Farah; Clarke, Aileen; Deeks, Jonathan J

2018-05-09

To understand whether international differences in recommendations of whether to screen for rare diseases using the newborn blood spot test might in part be explained by use of systematic review methods. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Website searches of 26 national screening organisations. Journal articles, papers, legal documents, presentations, conference abstracts, or reports relating to a national recommendation on whether to screen for any condition using the newborn blood spot test, with no restrictions on date or language. Two reviewers independently assessed whether the recommendation for or against screening included systematic reviews, and data on test accuracy, benefits of early detection, and potential harms of overdiagnosis. The odds of recommending screening according to the use of systematic review methods was estimated across conditions using meta-analysis. 93 reports were included that assessed 104 conditions across 14 countries, totalling 276 recommendations (units of analysis). Screening was favoured in 159 (58%) recommendations, not favoured in 98 (36%), and not recommended either way in 19 (7%). Only 60 (22%) of the recommendations included a systematic review. Use of a systematic review was associated with a reduced probability of screening being recommended (23/60 (38%) v 136/216 (63%), odds ratio 0.17, 95% confidence interval 0.07 to 0.43). Of the recommendations, evidence for test accuracy, benefits of early detection, and overdiagnosis was not considered in 115 (42%), 83 (30%), and 211 (76%), respectively. Using systematic review methods is associated with a reduced probability of screening being recommended. Many national policy reviews of screening for rare conditions using the newborn blood spot test do not assess the evidence on the key benefits and harms of screening. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Economics methods in Cochrane systematic reviews of health promotion and public health related interventions

PubMed Central

Shemilt, Ian; Mugford, Miranda; Drummond, Michael; Eisenstein, Eric; Mallender, Jacqueline; McDaid, David; Vale, Luke; Walker, Damian

2006-01-01

Background Provision of evidence on costs alongside evidence on the effects of interventions can enhance the relevance of systematic reviews to decision-making. However, patterns of use of economics methods alongside systematic review remain unclear. Reviews of evidence on the effects of interventions are published by both the Cochrane and Campbell Collaborations. Although it is not a requirement that Cochrane or Campbell Reviews should consider economic aspects of interventions, many do. This study aims to explore and describe approaches to incorporating economics methods in a selection of Cochrane systematic reviews in the area of health promotion and public health, to help inform development of methodological guidance on economics for reviewers. Methods The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched using a search strategy for potential economic evaluation studies. We included current Cochrane reviews and review protocols retrieved using the search that are also identified as relevant to health promotion or public health topics. A reviewer extracted data which describe the economics components of included reviews. Extracted data were summarised in tables and analysed qualitatively. Results Twenty-one completed Cochrane reviews and seven review protocols met inclusion criteria. None incorporate formal economic evaluation methods. Ten completed reviews explicitly aim to incorporate economics studies and data. There is a lack of transparent reporting of methods underpinning the incorporation of economics studies and data. Some reviews are likely to exclude useful economics studies and data due to a failure to incorporate search strategies tailored to the retrieval of such data or use of key specialist databases, and application of inclusion criteria designed for effectiveness studies. Conclusion There is a need for consistency and transparency in the reporting and conduct of the economics components of Cochrane reviews, as well as regular dialogue between Cochrane reviewers and economists to develop increased capacity for economic analyses alongside such reviews. Use of applicable economics methods in Cochrane reviews can help provide the international context within which economics data can be interpreted and assessed as a preliminary to full economic evaluation. PMID:17107612

Mobile Phone-Based Behavioural Interventions for Health: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Buhi, Eric R.; Trudnak, Tara E.; Martinasek, Mary P.; Oberne, Alison B.; Fuhrmann, Hollie J.; McDermott, Robert J.

2013-01-01

Objective: To perform a systematic review of the literature concerning behavioural mobile health (mHealth) and summarize points related to heath topic, use of theory, audience, purpose, design, intervention components, and principal results that can inform future health education applications. Design: A systematic review of the literature. Method:…

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 critically appraised before translating them to a clinical context. PMID:25541734

Novel keyword co-occurrence network-based methods to foster systematic reviews of scientific literature.

PubMed

Radhakrishnan, Srinivasan; Erbis, Serkan; Isaacs, Jacqueline A; Kamarthi, Sagar

2017-01-01

Systematic reviews of scientific literature are important for mapping the existing state of research and highlighting further growth channels in a field of study, but systematic reviews are inherently tedious, time consuming, and manual in nature. In recent years, keyword co-occurrence networks (KCNs) are exploited for knowledge mapping. In a KCN, each keyword is represented as a node and each co-occurrence of a pair of words is represented as a link. The number of times that a pair of words co-occurs in multiple articles constitutes the weight of the link connecting the pair. The network constructed in this manner represents cumulative knowledge of a domain and helps to uncover meaningful knowledge components and insights based on the patterns and strength of links between keywords that appear in the literature. In this work, we propose a KCN-based approach that can be implemented prior to undertaking a systematic review to guide and accelerate the review process. The novelty of this method lies in the new metrics used for statistical analysis of a KCN that differ from those typically used for KCN analysis. The approach is demonstrated through its application to nano-related Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) risk literature. The KCN approach identified the knowledge components, knowledge structure, and research trends that match with those discovered through a traditional systematic review of the nanoEHS field. Because KCN-based analyses can be conducted more quickly to explore a vast amount of literature, this method can provide a knowledge map and insights prior to undertaking a rigorous traditional systematic review. This two-step approach can significantly reduce the effort and time required for a traditional systematic literature review. The proposed KCN-based pre-systematic review method is universal. It can be applied to any scientific field of study to prepare a knowledge map.

Novel keyword co-occurrence network-based methods to foster systematic reviews of scientific literature

PubMed Central

Isaacs, Jacqueline A.

2017-01-01

Systematic reviews of scientific literature are important for mapping the existing state of research and highlighting further growth channels in a field of study, but systematic reviews are inherently tedious, time consuming, and manual in nature. In recent years, keyword co-occurrence networks (KCNs) are exploited for knowledge mapping. In a KCN, each keyword is represented as a node and each co-occurrence of a pair of words is represented as a link. The number of times that a pair of words co-occurs in multiple articles constitutes the weight of the link connecting the pair. The network constructed in this manner represents cumulative knowledge of a domain and helps to uncover meaningful knowledge components and insights based on the patterns and strength of links between keywords that appear in the literature. In this work, we propose a KCN-based approach that can be implemented prior to undertaking a systematic review to guide and accelerate the review process. The novelty of this method lies in the new metrics used for statistical analysis of a KCN that differ from those typically used for KCN analysis. The approach is demonstrated through its application to nano-related Environmental, Health, and Safety (EHS) risk literature. The KCN approach identified the knowledge components, knowledge structure, and research trends that match with those discovered through a traditional systematic review of the nanoEHS field. Because KCN-based analyses can be conducted more quickly to explore a vast amount of literature, this method can provide a knowledge map and insights prior to undertaking a rigorous traditional systematic review. This two-step approach can significantly reduce the effort and time required for a traditional systematic literature review. The proposed KCN-based pre-systematic review method is universal. It can be applied to any scientific field of study to prepare a knowledge map. PMID:28328983

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.

Methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews on tuberculosis.

PubMed

Nicolau, I; Ling, D; Tian, L; Lienhardt, C; Pai, M

2013-09-01

Systematic reviews are used to inform tuberculosis (TB) guidelines. However, there are no data on whether TB systematic reviews are conducted well and reported transparently. We searched four databases for reviews published between 2005 and 2010. Methodological quality was evaluated using AMSTAR and quality of reporting was assessed using PRISMA. Of 152 articles, 137 (90%) met the inclusion criteria. Only 3 of 11 AMSTAR quality items were met in most reviews: appropriate methods to combine findings (67%), comprehensive literature search (72%) and presentation of characteristics of included studies (90%). The other eight items were met in 4-53% of the reviews. Only 4% of the reviews disclosed conflicts of interest. The majority of the PRISMA items were reported in more than 60-76% of the reviews. Only nine items were reported in less than 55% of the reviews, the lowest being the full-search strategy (30%), risk of bias across studies in the Methods (27%) and Results (21%) sections, and indication of a review protocol (15%). Systematic reviews in our survey were well reported but generally of moderate to low quality. Better training, use of reporting guidelines and registration of systematic reviews could improve the quality of TB reviews.

Incorporating Qualitative Evidence in Systematic Reviews: Strategies and Challenges

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Caracelli, Valerie J.; Cooksy, Leslie J.

2013-01-01

The quality of mixed methods systematic reviews relies on the quality of primary-level studies. The synthesis of qualitative evidence and the recent development of synthesizing mixed methods studies hold promise, but also pose challenges to evidence synthesis.

How to get started with a systematic review in epidemiology: an introductory guide for early career researchers.

PubMed

Denison, Hayley J; Dodds, Richard M; Ntani, Georgia; Cooper, Rachel; Cooper, Cyrus; Sayer, Avan Aihie; Baird, Janis

2013-08-07

Systematic review is a powerful research tool which aims to identify and synthesize all evidence relevant to a research question. The approach taken is much like that used in a scientific experiment, with high priority given to the transparency and reproducibility of the methods used and to handling all evidence in a consistent manner.Early career researchers may find themselves in a position where they decide to undertake a systematic review, for example it may form part or all of a PhD thesis. Those with no prior experience of systematic review may need considerable support and direction getting started with such a project. Here we set out in simple terms how to get started with a systematic review. Advice is given on matters such as developing a review protocol, searching using databases and other methods, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and data synthesis including meta-analysis. Signposts to further information and useful resources are also given. A well-conducted systematic review benefits the scientific field by providing a summary of existing evidence and highlighting unanswered questions. For the individual, undertaking a systematic review is also a great opportunity to improve skills in critical appraisal and in synthesising evidence.

Methodological problems in the use of indirect comparisons for evaluating healthcare interventions: survey of published systematic reviews.

PubMed

Song, Fujian; Loke, Yoon K; Walsh, Tanya; Glenny, Anne-Marie; Eastwood, Alison J; Altman, Douglas G

2009-04-03

To investigate basic assumptions and other methodological problems in the application of indirect comparison in systematic reviews of competing healthcare interventions. Survey of published systematic reviews. Inclusion criteria Systematic reviews published between 2000 and 2007 in which an indirect approach had been explicitly used. Identified reviews were assessed for comprehensiveness of the literature search, method for indirect comparison, and whether assumptions about similarity and consistency were explicitly mentioned. The survey included 88 review reports. In 13 reviews, indirect comparison was informal. Results from different trials were naively compared without using a common control in six reviews. Adjusted indirect comparison was usually done using classic frequentist methods (n=49) or more complex methods (n=18). The key assumption of trial similarity was explicitly mentioned in only 40 of the 88 reviews. The consistency assumption was not explicit in most cases where direct and indirect evidence were compared or combined (18/30). Evidence from head to head comparison trials was not systematically searched for or not included in nine cases. Identified methodological problems were an unclear understanding of underlying assumptions, inappropriate search and selection of relevant trials, use of inappropriate or flawed methods, lack of objective and validated methods to assess or improve trial similarity, and inadequate comparison or inappropriate combination of direct and indirect evidence. Adequate understanding of basic assumptions underlying indirect and mixed treatment comparison is crucial to resolve these methodological problems. APPENDIX 1: PubMed search strategy. APPENDIX 2: Characteristics of identified reports. APPENDIX 3: Identified studies. References of included studies.

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 present the results, including a narrative, graphical or tabular summary, or meta-analysis. When meta-analysis is not possible, a set of alternative methods for synthesizing research is available. On the basis of the research question and objectives, narrative, tabular and/or visual approaches can be used for data synthesis. There are some special considerations when conducting meta-analysis for questions related to risk and correlation. These include, but are not limited to, causal inference.Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies related to etiology is an emerging methodology in the field of evidence synthesis. These reviews can provide useful information for healthcare professionals and policymakers on the burden of disease. The standardized Joanna Briggs Institute approach offers a rigorous and transparent method to conduct reviews of etiology.

Systematic reviews do not adequately report or address missing outcome data in their analyses: a methodological survey.

PubMed

Kahale, Lara A; Diab, Batoul; Brignardello-Petersen, Romina; Agarwal, Arnav; Mustafa, Reem A; Kwong, Joey; Neumann, Ignacio; Li, Ling; Lopes, Luciane Cruz; Briel, Matthias; Busse, Jason W; Iorio, Alfonso; Vandvik, Per Olav; Alexander, Paul Elias; Guyatt, Gordon; Akl, Elie A

2018-07-01

To describe how systematic review authors report and address categories of participants with potential missing outcome data of trial participants. Methodological survey of systematic reviews reporting a group-level meta-analysis. We included a random sample of 50 Cochrane and 50 non-Cochrane systematic reviews. Of these, 25 reported in their methods section a plan to consider at least one of the 10 categories of missing outcome data; 42 reported in their results, data for at least one category of missing data. The most reported category in the methods and results sections was "unexplained loss to follow-up" (n = 34 in methods section and n = 6 in the results section). Only 19 reported a method to handle missing data in their primary analyses, which was most often complete case analysis. Few reviews (n = 9) reported in the methods section conducting sensitivity analysis to judge risk of bias associated with missing outcome data at the level of the meta-analysis; and only five of them presented the results of these analyses in the results section. Most systematic reviews do not explicitly report sufficient information on categories of trial participants with potential missing outcome data or address missing data in their primary analyses. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Systematic Reviews of Research in Education: Aims, Myths and Multiple Methods

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gough, David; Thomas, James

2016-01-01

Systematic reviews are still a controversial topic in some quarters, with the arguments for and against their use being well-rehearsed. In an attempt to advance a more nuanced approach to thinking about systematic reviewing, this paper illustrates the wide range of theoretical perspectives, methodologies and purposes that underpin the vast range…

Evidence-Based Systematic Review: Effects of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation on Swallowing and Neural Activation

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Clark, Heather; Lazarus, Cathy; Arvedson, Joan; Schooling, Tracy; Frymark, Tobi

2009-01-01

Purpose: To systematically review the literature examining the effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) on swallowing and neural activation. The review was conducted as part of a series examining the effects of oral motor exercises (OMEs) on speech, swallowing, and neural activation. Method: A systematic search was conducted to…

Including mixed methods research in systematic reviews: Examples from qualitative syntheses in TB and malaria control

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Background Health policy makers now have access to a greater number and variety of systematic reviews to inform different stages in the policy making process, including reviews of qualitative research. The inclusion of mixed methods studies in systematic reviews is increasing, but these studies pose particular challenges to methods of review. This article examines the quality of the reporting of mixed methods and qualitative-only studies. Methods We used two completed systematic reviews to generate a sample of qualitative studies and mixed method studies in order to make an assessment of how the quality of reporting and rigor of qualitative-only studies compares with that of mixed-methods studies. Results Overall, the reporting of qualitative studies in our sample was consistently better when compared with the reporting of mixed methods studies. We found that mixed methods studies are less likely to provide a description of the research conduct or qualitative data analysis procedures and less likely to be judged credible or provide rich data and thick description compared with standalone qualitative studies. Our time-related analysis shows that for both types of study, papers published since 2003 are more likely to report on the study context, describe analysis procedures, and be judged credible and provide rich data. However, the reporting of other aspects of research conduct (i.e. descriptions of the research question, the sampling strategy, and data collection methods) in mixed methods studies does not appear to have improved over time. Conclusions Mixed methods research makes an important contribution to health research in general, and could make a more substantial contribution to systematic reviews. Through our careful analysis of the quality of reporting of mixed methods and qualitative-only research, we have identified areas that deserve more attention in the conduct and reporting of mixed methods research. PMID:22545681

Time to consider sharing data extracted from trials included in systematic reviews.

PubMed

Wolfenden, Luke; Grimshaw, Jeremy; Williams, Christopher M; Yoong, Sze Lin

2016-11-03

While the debate regarding shared clinical trial data has shifted from whether such data should be shared to how this is best achieved, the sharing of data collected as part of systematic reviews has received little attention. In this commentary, we discuss the potential benefits of coordinated efforts to share data collected as part of systematic reviews. There are a number of potential benefits of systematic review data sharing. Shared information and data obtained as part of the systematic review process may reduce unnecessary duplication, reduce demand on trialist to service repeated requests from reviewers for data, and improve the quality and efficiency of future reviews. Sharing also facilitates research to improve clinical trial and systematic review methods and supports additional analyses to address secondary research questions. While concerns regarding appropriate use of data, costs, or the academic return for original review authors may impede more open access to information extracted as part of systematic reviews, many of these issues are being addressed, and infrastructure to enable greater access to such information is being developed. Embracing systems to enable more open access to systematic review data has considerable potential to maximise the benefits of research investment in undertaking systematic reviews.

Seeing the forests and the trees—innovative approaches to exploring heterogeneity in systematic reviews of complex interventions to enhance health system decision-making: a protocol

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background To improve quality of care and patient outcomes, health system decision-makers need to identify and implement effective interventions. An increasing number of systematic reviews document the effects of quality improvement programs to assist decision-makers in developing new initiatives. However, limitations in the reporting of primary studies and current meta-analysis methods (including approaches for exploring heterogeneity) reduce the utility of existing syntheses for health system decision-makers. This study will explore the role of innovative meta-analysis approaches and the added value of enriched and updated data for increasing the utility of systematic reviews of complex interventions. Methods/Design We will use the dataset from our recent systematic review of 142 randomized trials of diabetes quality improvement programs to evaluate novel approaches for exploring heterogeneity. These will include exploratory methods, such as multivariate meta-regression analyses and all-subsets combinatorial meta-analysis. We will then update our systematic review to include new trials and enrich the dataset by surveying authors of all included trials. In doing so, we will explore the impact of variables not, reported in previous publications, such as details of study context, on the effectiveness of the intervention. We will use innovative analytical methods on the enriched and updated dataset to identify key success factors in the implementation of quality improvement interventions for diabetes. Decision-makers will be involved throughout to help identify and prioritize variables to be explored and to aid in the interpretation and dissemination of results. Discussion This study will inform future systematic reviews of complex interventions and describe the value of enriching and updating data for exploring heterogeneity in meta-analysis. It will also result in an updated comprehensive systematic review of diabetes quality improvement interventions that will be useful to health system decision-makers in developing interventions to improve outcomes for people with diabetes. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registration no. CRD42013005165 PMID:25115289

Reviewing the research methods literature: principles and strategies illustrated by a systematic overview of sampling in qualitative research.

PubMed

Gentles, Stephen J; Charles, Cathy; Nicholas, David B; Ploeg, Jenny; McKibbon, K Ann

2016-10-11

Overviews of methods are potentially useful means to increase clarity and enhance collective understanding of specific methods topics that may be characterized by ambiguity, inconsistency, or a lack of comprehensiveness. This type of review represents a distinct literature synthesis method, although to date, its methodology remains relatively undeveloped despite several aspects that demand unique review procedures. The purpose of this paper is to initiate discussion about what a rigorous systematic approach to reviews of methods, referred to here as systematic methods overviews, might look like by providing tentative suggestions for approaching specific challenges likely to be encountered. The guidance offered here was derived from experience conducting a systematic methods overview on the topic of sampling in qualitative research. The guidance is organized into several principles that highlight specific objectives for this type of review given the common challenges that must be overcome to achieve them. Optional strategies for achieving each principle are also proposed, along with discussion of how they were successfully implemented in the overview on sampling. We describe seven paired principles and strategies that address the following aspects: delimiting the initial set of publications to consider, searching beyond standard bibliographic databases, searching without the availability of relevant metadata, selecting publications on purposeful conceptual grounds, defining concepts and other information to abstract iteratively, accounting for inconsistent terminology used to describe specific methods topics, and generating rigorous verifiable analytic interpretations. Since a broad aim in systematic methods overviews is to describe and interpret the relevant literature in qualitative terms, we suggest that iterative decision making at various stages of the review process, and a rigorous qualitative approach to analysis are necessary features of this review type. We believe that the principles and strategies provided here will be useful to anyone choosing to undertake a systematic methods overview. This paper represents an initial effort to promote high quality critical evaluations of the literature regarding problematic methods topics, which have the potential to promote clearer, shared understandings, and accelerate advances in research methods. Further work is warranted to develop more definitive guidance.

Systematic reviews of therapeutic interventions frequently consider patient-important outcomes.

PubMed

Ameur, Hayet; Ravaud, Philippe; Fayard, Florence; Riveros, Carolina; Dechartres, Agnes

2017-04-01

To determine whether recently published and ongoing systematic reviews of therapeutic interventions assess patient-important outcomes. For this methodological review, we searched MEDLINE via PubMed for recently published systematic reviews and online registry of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) for ongoing systematic reviews. We selected systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. We extracted all outcomes defined in the methods section and categorized them. Mortality, other clinical events, pain, quality of life, function, and therapeutic decisions were considered patient-important outcomes. We included 420 systematic reviews: 90 Cochrane reviews, 200 other published reviews, and 130 registered ongoing reviews. Primary outcomes were defined in 85 Cochrane reviews (95%), 98 (49%) other published reviews and all ongoing reviews. At least one patient-important outcome was defined as a primary outcome in 81/85 Cochrane reviews (95%), 78/98 other published reviews (80%), and 117/130 ongoing reviews (90%). Considering all outcomes assessed, at least one patient-important outcome was evaluated in 90/90 Cochrane reviews (100%), 189/200 other published reviews (95%), and 121/130 ongoing reviews (93%). Most recent systematic reviews aim to assess patient-important outcomes, which contrasts with RCTs. These results suggest some important gaps between primary and secondary research. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Using logic model methods in systematic review synthesis: describing complex pathways in referral management interventions

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background There is increasing interest in innovative methods to carry out systematic reviews of complex interventions. Theory-based approaches, such as logic models, have been suggested as a means of providing additional insights beyond that obtained via conventional review methods. Methods This paper reports the use of an innovative method which combines systematic review processes with logic model techniques to synthesise a broad range of literature. The potential value of the model produced was explored with stakeholders. Results The review identified 295 papers that met the inclusion criteria. The papers consisted of 141 intervention studies and 154 non-intervention quantitative and qualitative articles. A logic model was systematically built from these studies. The model outlines interventions, short term outcomes, moderating and mediating factors and long term demand management outcomes and impacts. Interventions were grouped into typologies of practitioner education, process change, system change, and patient intervention. Short-term outcomes identified that may result from these interventions were changed physician or patient knowledge, beliefs or attitudes and also interventions related to changed doctor-patient interaction. A range of factors which may influence whether these outcomes lead to long term change were detailed. Demand management outcomes and intended impacts included content of referral, rate of referral, and doctor or patient satisfaction. Conclusions The logic model details evidence and assumptions underpinning the complex pathway from interventions to demand management impact. The method offers a useful addition to systematic review methodologies. Trial registration number PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013004037. PMID:24885751

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.

Effects of Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT) on Nonopioid Drug Abuse: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Filges, Trine; Andersen, Ditte; Jørgensen, Anne-Marie Klint

2018-01-01

Purpose: This review evaluates the evidence of the effects of multidimensional family therapy (MDFT) on drug use reduction in young people for the treatment of nonopioid drug use. Method: We followed Campbell Collaboration guidelines to conduct a systematic review of randomized and nonrandomized trials. Meta-analytic methods were used to…

A review of the reporting of web searching to identify studies for Cochrane systematic reviews.

PubMed

Briscoe, Simon

2018-03-01

The literature searches that are used to identify studies for inclusion in a systematic review should be comprehensively reported. This ensures that the literature searches are transparent and reproducible, which is important for assessing the strengths and weaknesses of a systematic review and re-running the literature searches when conducting an update review. Web searching using search engines and the websites of topically relevant organisations is sometimes used as a supplementary literature search method. Previous research has shown that the reporting of web searching in systematic reviews often lacks important details and is thus not transparent or reproducible. Useful details to report about web searching include the name of the search engine or website, the URL, the date searched, the search strategy, and the number of results. This study reviews the reporting of web searching to identify studies for Cochrane systematic reviews published in the 6-month period August 2016 to January 2017 (n = 423). Of these reviews, 61 reviews reported using web searching using a search engine or website as a literature search method. In the majority of reviews, the reporting of web searching was found to lack essential detail for ensuring transparency and reproducibility, such as the search terms. Recommendations are made on how to improve the reporting of web searching in Cochrane systematic reviews. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A decade of individual participant data meta-analyses: A review of current practice.

PubMed

Simmonds, Mark; Stewart, Gavin; Stewart, Lesley

2015-11-01

Individual participant data (IPD) systematic reviews and meta-analyses are often considered to be the gold standard for meta-analysis. In the ten years since the first review into the methodology and reporting practice of IPD reviews was published much has changed in the field. This paper investigates current reporting and statistical practice in IPD systematic reviews. A systematic review was performed to identify systematic reviews that collected and analysed IPD. Data were extracted from each included publication on a variety of issues related to the reporting of IPD review process, and the statistical methods used. There has been considerable growth in the use of "one-stage" methods to perform IPD meta-analyses. The majority of reviews consider at least one covariate other than the primary intervention, either using subgroup analysis or including covariates in one-stage regression models. Random-effects analyses, however, are not often used. Reporting of review methods was often limited, with few reviews presenting a risk-of-bias assessment. Details on issues specific to the use of IPD were little reported, including how IPD were obtained; how data was managed and checked for consistency and errors; and for how many studies and participants IPD were sought and obtained. While the last ten years have seen substantial changes in how IPD meta-analyses are performed there remains considerable scope for improving the quality of reporting for both the process of IPD systematic reviews, and the statistical methods employed in them. It is to be hoped that the publication of the PRISMA-IPD guidelines specific to IPD reviews will improve reporting in this area. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Supporting Evidence-Informed Teaching in Biomedical and Health Professions Education Through Knowledge Translation: An Interdisciplinary Literature Review.

PubMed

Tractenberg, Rochelle E; Gordon, Morris

2017-01-01

Phenomenon: The purpose of "systematic" reviews/reviewers of medical and health professions educational research is to identify best practices. This qualitative article explores the question of whether systematic reviews can support "evidence informed" teaching and contrasts traditional systematic reviewing with a knowledge translation (KT) approach to this objective. Degrees of freedom analysis (DOFA) is used to examine the alignment of systematic review methods with educational research and the pedagogical strategies and approaches that might be considered with a decision-making framework developed to support valid assessment. This method is also used to explore how KT can be used to inform teaching and learning. The nature of educational research is not compatible with most (11/14) methods for systematic review. The inconsistency of systematic reviewing with the nature of educational research impedes both the identification and implementation of "best-evidence" pedagogy and teaching. This is primarily because research questions that do support the purposes of review do not support educational decision making. By contrast to systematic reviews of the literature, both a DOFA and KT are fully compatible with informing teaching using evidence. A DOFA supports the translation of theory to a specific teaching or learning case, so could be considered a type of KT. The DOFA results in a test of alignment of decision options with relevant educational theory, and KT leads to interventions in teaching or learning that can be evaluated. Examples of how to structure evaluable interventions are derived from a KT approach that are simply not available from a systematic review. Insights: Systematic reviewing of current empirical educational research is not suitable for deriving or supporting best practices in education. However, both "evidence-informed" and scholarly approaches to teaching can be supported as KT projects, which are inherently evaluable and can generate actionable evidence about whether the decision or intervention worked for students, instructors, and the institution. A DOFA can also support evidence- and theory-informed teaching to develop an understanding of what works, why, and for whom. Thus KT, but not systematic reviewing, can support decision making around pedagogy (and pedagogical innovation) that can also inform new teaching and learning initiatives; it can also point to new avenues of empirical research in education that are informed by, and can inform, theory.

Behavioural Intervention Practices for Stereotypic and Repetitive Behaviour in Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Patterson, Stephanie Y.; Smith, Veronica; Jelen, Michaela

2010-01-01

Aim: The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the quality of conduct of experimental studies contributing to our empirical understanding of function-based behavioural interventions for stereotypic and repetitive behaviours (SRBs) in individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). Method: Systematic review methodology was used to…

Development of an algorithm to provide awareness in choosing study designs for inclusion in systematic reviews of healthcare interventions: a method study

PubMed Central

Peinemann, Frank; Kleijnen, Jos

2015-01-01

Objectives To develop an algorithm that aims to provide guidance and awareness for choosing multiple study designs in systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. Design Method study: (1) To summarise the literature base on the topic. (2) To apply the integration of various study types in systematic reviews. (3) To devise decision points and outline a pragmatic decision tree. (4) To check the plausibility of the algorithm by backtracking its pathways in four systematic reviews. Results (1) The results of our systematic review of the published literature have already been published. (2) We recaptured the experience from our four previously conducted systematic reviews that required the integration of various study types. (3) We chose length of follow-up (long, short), frequency of events (rare, frequent) and types of outcome as decision points (death, disease, discomfort, disability, dissatisfaction) and aligned the study design labels according to the Cochrane Handbook. We also considered practical or ethical concerns, and the problem of unavailable high-quality evidence. While applying the algorithm, disease-specific circumstances and aims of interventions should be considered. (4) We confirmed the plausibility of the pathways of the algorithm. Conclusions We propose that the algorithm can assist to bring seminal features of a systematic review with multiple study designs to the attention of anyone who is planning to conduct a systematic review. It aims to increase awareness and we think that it may reduce the time burden on review authors and may contribute to the production of a higher quality review. PMID:26289450

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.

Using logic model methods in systematic review synthesis: describing complex pathways in referral management interventions.

PubMed

Baxter, Susan K; Blank, Lindsay; Woods, Helen Buckley; Payne, Nick; Rimmer, Melanie; Goyder, Elizabeth

2014-05-10

There is increasing interest in innovative methods to carry out systematic reviews of complex interventions. Theory-based approaches, such as logic models, have been suggested as a means of providing additional insights beyond that obtained via conventional review methods. This paper reports the use of an innovative method which combines systematic review processes with logic model techniques to synthesise a broad range of literature. The potential value of the model produced was explored with stakeholders. The review identified 295 papers that met the inclusion criteria. The papers consisted of 141 intervention studies and 154 non-intervention quantitative and qualitative articles. A logic model was systematically built from these studies. The model outlines interventions, short term outcomes, moderating and mediating factors and long term demand management outcomes and impacts. Interventions were grouped into typologies of practitioner education, process change, system change, and patient intervention. Short-term outcomes identified that may result from these interventions were changed physician or patient knowledge, beliefs or attitudes and also interventions related to changed doctor-patient interaction. A range of factors which may influence whether these outcomes lead to long term change were detailed. Demand management outcomes and intended impacts included content of referral, rate of referral, and doctor or patient satisfaction. The logic model details evidence and assumptions underpinning the complex pathway from interventions to demand management impact. The method offers a useful addition to systematic review methodologies. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013004037.

Initial Teacher Training to Promote Health and Well-Being in Schools--A Systematic Review of Effectiveness, Barriers and Facilitators

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Shepherd, Jonathan; Pickett, Karen; Dewhirst, Sue; Byrne, Jenny; Speller, Viv; Grace, Marcus; Almond, Palo; Roderick, Paul

2016-01-01

Objectives: To conduct a systematic review of effectiveness, and barriers and facilitators, of initial teacher training to promote health and well-being in schools. Design: Systematic review of the literature. Method: A total of 20 bibliographic databases were searched, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Social Science Citation Index. Studies were…

Evidence synthesis and its role in evidence-based health care.

PubMed

Pearson, Alan

2014-12-01

The central role of evidence synthesis (or the systematic review of evidence) in evidence-based health care is often poorly understood. There are numerous examples in the literature of poorly conceived and/or executed systematic reviews and of a lack of awareness of the international standards developed by the international leaders in systematic reviews. The Cochrane Collaboration has played a critical global role in developing and refining systematic review methods in relation to evidence of effects and of diagnostic accuracy. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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.

Applying systematic review search methods to the grey literature: a case study examining guidelines for school-based breakfast programs in Canada.

PubMed

Godin, Katelyn; Stapleton, Jackie; Kirkpatrick, Sharon I; Hanning, Rhona M; Leatherdale, Scott T

2015-10-22

Grey literature is an important source of information for large-scale review syntheses. However, there are many characteristics of grey literature that make it difficult to search systematically. Further, there is no 'gold standard' for rigorous systematic grey literature search methods and few resources on how to conduct this type of search. This paper describes systematic review search methods that were developed and applied to complete a case study systematic review of grey literature that examined guidelines for school-based breakfast programs in Canada. A grey literature search plan was developed to incorporate four different searching strategies: (1) grey literature databases, (2) customized Google search engines, (3) targeted websites, and (4) consultation with contact experts. These complementary strategies were used to minimize the risk of omitting relevant sources. Since abstracts are often unavailable in grey literature documents, items' abstracts, executive summaries, or table of contents (whichever was available) were screened. Screening of publications' full-text followed. Data were extracted on the organization, year published, who they were developed by, intended audience, goal/objectives of document, sources of evidence/resources cited, meals mentioned in the guidelines, and recommendations for program delivery. The search strategies for identifying and screening publications for inclusion in the case study review was found to be manageable, comprehensive, and intuitive when applied in practice. The four search strategies of the grey literature search plan yielded 302 potentially relevant items for screening. Following the screening process, 15 publications that met all eligibility criteria remained and were included in the case study systematic review. The high-level findings of the case study systematic review are briefly described. This article demonstrated a feasible and seemingly robust method for applying systematic search strategies to identify web-based resources in the grey literature. The search strategy we developed and tested is amenable to adaptation to identify other types of grey literature from other disciplines and answering a wide range of research questions. This method should be further adapted and tested in future research syntheses.

The application of knowledge synthesis methods in agri-food public health: recent advancements, challenges and opportunities.

PubMed

Young, Ian; Waddell, Lisa; Sanchez, Javier; Wilhelm, Barbara; McEwen, Scott A; Rajić, Andrijana

2014-03-01

Knowledge synthesis refers to the integration of findings from individual research studies on a given topic or question into the global knowledge base. The application of knowledge synthesis methods, particularly systematic reviews and meta-analysis, has increased considerably in the agri-food public health sector over the past decade and this trend is expected to continue. The objectives of our review were: (1) to describe the most promising knowledge synthesis methods and their applicability in agri-food public health, and (2) to summarize the recent advancements, challenges, and opportunities in the use of systematic review and meta-analysis methods in this sector. We performed a structured review of knowledge synthesis literature from various disciplines to address the first objective, and used comprehensive insights and experiences in applying these methods in the agri-food public health sector to inform the second objective. We describe five knowledge synthesis methods that can be used to address various agri-food public health questions or topics under different conditions and contexts. Scoping reviews describe the main characteristics and knowledge gaps in a broad research field and can be used to evaluate opportunities for prioritizing focused questions for related systematic reviews. Structured rapid reviews are streamlined systematic reviews conducted within a short timeframe to inform urgent decision-making. Mixed-method and qualitative reviews synthesize diverse sources of contextual knowledge (e.g. socio-cognitive, economic, and feasibility considerations). Systematic reviews are a structured and transparent method used to summarize and synthesize literature on a clearly-defined question, and meta-analysis is the statistical combination of data from multiple individual studies. We briefly describe and discuss key advancements in the use of systematic reviews and meta-analysis, including: risk-of-bias assessments; an overall quality-of-evidence approach; engagement of stakeholders; Bayesian, multivariate, and network meta-analysis; and synthesis of diagnostic test accuracy studies. We also highlight several challenges and opportunities in the conduct of systematic reviews (e.g. inclusion of grey literature, minimizing language bias, and optimizing search strategies) and meta-analysis (e.g. inclusion of observational studies and approaches to address the insufficient reporting of data and significant heterogeneity). Many of these developments have yet to be comprehensively applied and evaluated in an agri-food public health context, and more research is needed in this area. There is a need to strengthen knowledge synthesis capacity and infrastructure at the regional, national, and international levels in this sector to ensure that the best available knowledge is used to inform future decision-making about agri-food public health issues. Crown Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Systematic reviews addressing identified health policy priorities in Eastern Mediterranean countries: a situational analysis

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Systematic reviews can offer policymakers and stakeholders concise, transparent, and relevant evidence pertaining to pressing policy priorities to help inform the decision-making process. The production and the use of systematic reviews are specifically limited in the Eastern Mediterranean region. The extent to which published systematic reviews address policy priorities in the region is still unknown. This situational analysis exercise aims at assessing the extent to which published systematic reviews address policy priorities identified by policymakers and stakeholders in Eastern Mediterranean region countries. It also provides an overview about the state of systematic review production in the region and identifies knowledge gaps. Methods We conducted a systematic search of the Health System Evidence database to identify published systematic reviews on policy-relevant priorities pertaining to the following themes: human resources for health, health financing, the role of the non-state sector, and access to medicine. Priorities were identified from two priority-setting exercises conducted in the region. We described the distribution of these systematic reviews across themes, sub-themes, authors’ affiliations, and countries where included primary studies were conducted. Results Out of the 1,045 systematic reviews identified in Health System Evidence on selected themes, a total of 200 systematic reviews (19.1%) addressed the priorities from the Eastern Mediterranean region. The theme with the largest number of systematic reviews included was human resources for health (115) followed by health financing (33), access to medicine (27), and role of the non-state sector (25). Authors based in the region produced only three systematic reviews addressing regional priorities (1.5%). Furthermore, no systematic review focused on the Eastern Mediterranean region. Primary studies from the region had limited contribution to systematic reviews; 17 systematic reviews (8.5%) included primary studies conducted in the region. Conclusions There are still gaps in the production of systematic reviews addressing policymakers’ and stakeholders’ priorities in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Efforts should be directed towards better aligning systematic review production with policy needs and priorities. Study findings can inform the agendas of researchers, research institutions, and international funding agencies of priority areas where systematic reviews are required. PMID:25139256

Celebrating methodological challenges and changes: reflecting on the emergence and importance of the role of qualitative evidence in Cochrane reviews

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Cochrane systematic reviews have proven to be beneficial for decision making processes, both on a practitioner and a policy level, and there are current initiatives to extend the types of evidence used by them, including qualitative research. In this article we outline the major achievements of the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group. Although the Group has encountered numerous challenges in dealing with the evolution of qualitative evidence synthesis, both outside and within the Cochrane Collaboration, it has successfully responded to the challenges posed in terms of incorporating qualitative evidence in systematic reviews. The Methods Group will continue to advocate for more flexible and inclusive approaches to evidence synthesis in order to meet the exciting challenges and opportunities presented by mixed methods systematic reviews and reviews of complex interventions. PMID:24135194

Technology in Social Work Education: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wretman, Christopher J.; Macy, Rebecca J.

2016-01-01

Given the growing prevalence of technology-based instruction, social work faculty need a clear understanding of the strengths and limitations of these methods. We systematically examined the evidence for technology-based instruction in social work education. Using comprehensive and rigorous methods, 38 articles were included in the review. Of…

Child-Parent Interventions for Childhood Anxiety Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Brendel, Kristen Esposito; Maynard, Brandy R.

2014-01-01

Objective: This study compared the effects of direct child-parent interventions to the effects of child-focused interventions on anxiety outcomes for children with anxiety disorders. Method: Systematic review methods and meta-analytic techniques were employed. Eight randomized controlled trials examining effects of family cognitive behavior…

Measuring School Functioning in Students with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Tollit, Michelle; Politis, Jennifer; Knight, Sarah

2018-01-01

Background: It is often surmised that school functioning is significantly impacted in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS); however, how this phenomenon manifests itself has rarely been characterized. Methods: This systematic review synthesized and critically appraised methods, constructs, and instruments used to assess school functioning in students…

Reliability and Validity of Survey Instruments to Measure Work-Related Fatigue in the Emergency Medical Services Setting: A Systematic Review

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

2018-01-11

Background: This study sought to systematically search the literature to identify reliable and valid survey instruments for fatigue measurement in the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) occupational setting. Methods: A systematic review study design wa...

Systematic Review Protocol for the IRIS Chloroform Assessment (Inhalation) (Preliminary Assessment Materials)

EPA Science Inventory

In January 2018, EPA released the Systematic Review Protocol for the IRIS Chloroform Assessment (Inhalation). As part of developing a draft IRIS assessment, EPA presents a methods document, referred to as the protocol, for conducting a chemical-specific systematic revie...

Advancing Systematic Review Workshop (December 2015)

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

EPA hosted an event to examine the systematic review process for development and applications of methods for different types of evidence (epidemiology, animal toxicology, and mechanistic). The presentations are also available.

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.

Reporting guidance considerations from a statistical perspective: overview of tools to enhance the rigour of reporting of randomised trials and systematic reviews.

PubMed

Hutton, Brian; Wolfe, Dianna; Moher, David; Shamseer, Larissa

2017-05-01

Research waste has received considerable attention from the biomedical community. One noteworthy contributor is incomplete reporting in research publications. When detailing statistical methods and results, ensuring analytic methods and findings are completely documented improves transparency. For publications describing randomised trials and systematic reviews, guidelines have been developed to facilitate complete reporting. This overview summarises aspects of statistical reporting in trials and systematic reviews of health interventions. A narrative approach to summarise features regarding statistical methods and findings from reporting guidelines for trials and reviews was taken. We aim to enhance familiarity of statistical details that should be reported in biomedical research among statisticians and their collaborators. We summarise statistical reporting considerations for trials and systematic reviews from guidance documents including the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement for reporting of trials, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) Statement for trial protocols, the Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature (SAMPL) Guidelines for statistical reporting principles, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement for systematic reviews and PRISMA for Protocols (PRISMA-P). Considerations regarding sharing of study data and statistical code are also addressed. Reporting guidelines provide researchers with minimum criteria for reporting. If followed, they can enhance research transparency and contribute improve quality of biomedical publications. Authors should employ these tools for planning and reporting of their research. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Overview of systematic reviews of therapeutic ranges: methodologies and recommendations for practice.

PubMed

Cooney, Lewis; Loke, Yoon K; Golder, Su; Kirkham, Jamie; Jorgensen, Andrea; Sinha, Ian; Hawcutt, Daniel

2017-06-02

Many medicines are dosed to achieve a particular therapeutic range, and monitored using therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). The evidence base for a therapeutic range can be evaluated using systematic reviews, to ensure it continues to reflect current indications, doses, routes and formulations, as well as updated adverse effect data. There is no consensus on the optimal methodology for systematic reviews of therapeutic ranges. An overview of systematic reviews of therapeutic ranges was undertaken. The following databases were used: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Database of Abstracts and Reviews of Effects (DARE) and MEDLINE. The published methodologies used when systematically reviewing the therapeutic range of a drug were analyzed. Step by step recommendations to optimize such systematic reviews are proposed. Ten systematic reviews that investigated the correlation between serum concentrations and clinical outcomes encompassing a variety of medicines and indications were assessed. There were significant variations in the methodologies used (including the search terms used, data extraction methods, assessment of bias, and statistical analyses undertaken). Therapeutic ranges should be population and indication specific and based on clinically relevant outcomes. Recommendations for future systematic reviews based on these findings have been developed. Evidence based therapeutic ranges have the potential to improve TDM practice. Current systematic reviews investigating therapeutic ranges have highly variable methodologies and there is no consensus of best practice when undertaking systematic reviews in this field. These recommendations meet a need not addressed by standard protocols.

A review of the use of a systematic observation method in coaching research between 1997 and 2016.

PubMed

Cope, Ed; Partington, Mark; Harvey, Stephen

2017-10-01

A systematic observation method has been one of the most popularly employed methods in coaching research. Kahan's review of this method conducted between 1975 and 1997 highlighted the key trends in this research, and offered methodological guidance for researchers wishing to use this method in their research. The purpose of this review was to provide an update of the use of a systematic observation method in coaching research and assess the extent to which the calls made by Kahan have been addressed. While in some respect this field of study has progressed (i.e., the introduction of qualitative methods), researchers adopting this method have failed to attend to many of the issues Kahan raised. For this method to continue to make a positive contribution towards the coaching research literature, researchers need to more critically reflect on how and why they are employing this method. At present, some of the decisions made by researchers who have conducted work in this area are not justified with a rationale. It is our intention that this review will serve as guidance for researchers and practitioners, and editors and reviewers of journals when attempting to assess the quality of this type of work.

Publication bias in dermatology systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

PubMed

Atakpo, Paul; Vassar, Matt

2016-05-01

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in dermatology provide high-level evidence for clinicians and policy makers that influence clinical decision making and treatment guidelines. One methodological problem with systematic reviews is the under representation of unpublished studies. This problem is due in part to publication bias. Omission of statistically non-significant data from meta-analyses may result in overestimation of treatment effect sizes which may lead to clinical consequences. Our goal was to assess whether systematic reviewers in dermatology evaluate and report publication bias. Further, we wanted to conduct our own evaluation of publication bias on meta-analyses that failed to do so. Our study considered systematic reviews and meta-analyses from ten dermatology journals from 2006 to 2016. A PubMed search was conducted, and all full-text articles that met our inclusion criteria were retrieved and coded by the primary author. 293 articles were included in our analysis. Additionally, we formally evaluated publication bias in meta-analyses that failed to do so using trim and fill and cumulative meta-analysis by precision methods. Publication bias was mentioned in 107 articles (36.5%) and was formally evaluated in 64 articles (21.8%). Visual inspection of a funnel plot was the most common method of evaluating publication bias. Publication bias was present in 45 articles (15.3%), not present in 57 articles (19.5%) and not determined in 191 articles (65.2%). Using the trim and fill method, 7 meta-analyses (33.33%) showed evidence of publication bias. Although the trim and fill method only found evidence of publication bias in 7 meta-analyses, the cumulative meta-analysis by precision method found evidence of publication bias in 15 meta-analyses (71.4%). Many of the reviews in our study did not mention or evaluate publication bias. Further, of the 42 articles that stated following PRISMA reporting guidelines, 19 (45.2%) evaluated for publication bias. In comparison to other studies, we found that systematic reviews in dermatology were less likely to evaluate for publication bias. Evaluating and reporting the likelihood of publication bias should be standard practice in systematic reviews when appropriate. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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.

Introduction to systematic reviews in animal agriculture and veterinary medicine.

PubMed

Sargeant, J M; O'Connor, A M

2014-06-01

This article is the first in a series of six articles related to systematic reviews in animal agriculture and veterinary medicine. In this article, we overview the methodology of systematic reviews and provide a discussion of their use. Systematic reviews differ qualitatively from traditional reviews by explicitly defining a specific review question, employing methods to reduce bias in the selection and inclusion of studies that address the review question (including a systematic and specified search strategy, and selection of studies based on explicit eligibility criteria), an assessment of the risk of bias for included studies and objectively summarizing the results qualitatively or quantitatively (i.e. via meta-analysis). Systematic reviews have been widely used to address human healthcare questions and are increasingly being used in veterinary medicine. Systematic reviews can provide veterinarians and other decision-makers with a scientifically defensible summary of the current state of knowledge on a topic without the need for the end-user to read the vast amount of primary research related to that topic. © 2014 Blackwell Verlag GmbH.

Reader's Block: A Systematic Review of Barriers to Adoption, Access and Use in E-Book User Studies

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Girard, Adam

2014-01-01

Introduction: This review of barriers to e-book use systematically identifies obstacles to engaging reading experiences. Through the use of an analytical framework, the users being studied, study setting, and methods used in previous work are described in order to identify promising areas for future research. Method: The method used is a…

Do We Need to Understand the Technology to Get to the Science? A Systematic Review of the Concept of Computer Literacy in Preventive Health Programs

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Dominick, Gregory M.; Friedman, Daniela B.; Hoffman-Goetz, Laurie

2009-01-01

Objective: To systematically review definitions and descriptions of computer literacy as related to preventive health education programs. Method: A systematic review of the concept of computer literacy as related to preventive health education was conducted. Empirical studies published between 1994 and 2007 on prevention education programs with a…

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

Searching for evidence or approval? A commentary on database search in systematic reviews and alternative information retrieval methodologies.

PubMed

Delaney, Aogán; Tamás, Peter A

2018-03-01

Despite recognition that database search alone is inadequate even within the health sciences, it appears that reviewers in fields that have adopted systematic review are choosing to rely primarily, or only, on database search for information retrieval. This commentary reminds readers of factors that call into question the appropriateness of default reliance on database searches particularly as systematic review is adapted for use in new and lower consensus fields. It then discusses alternative methods for information retrieval that require development, formalisation, and evaluation. Our goals are to encourage reviewers to reflect critically and transparently on their choice of information retrieval methods and to encourage investment in research on alternatives. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Navigation Guide Systematic Review Methodology: A Rigorous and Transparent Method for Translating Environmental Health Science into Better Health Outcomes

PubMed Central

Sutton, Patrice

2014-01-01

Background: Synthesizing what is known about the environmental drivers of health is instrumental to taking prevention-oriented action. Methods of research synthesis commonly used in environmental health lag behind systematic review methods developed in the clinical sciences over the past 20 years. Objectives: We sought to develop a proof of concept of the “Navigation Guide,” a systematic and transparent method of research synthesis in environmental health. Discussion: The Navigation Guide methodology builds on best practices in research synthesis in evidence-based medicine and environmental health. Key points of departure from current methods of expert-based narrative review prevalent in environmental health include a prespecified protocol, standardized and transparent documentation including expert judgment, a comprehensive search strategy, assessment of “risk of bias,” and separation of the science from values and preferences. Key points of departure from evidence-based medicine include assigning a “moderate” quality rating to human observational studies and combining diverse evidence streams. Conclusions: The Navigation Guide methodology is a systematic and rigorous approach to research synthesis that has been developed to reduce bias and maximize transparency in the evaluation of environmental health information. Although novel aspects of the method will require further development and validation, our findings demonstrated that improved methods of research synthesis under development at the National Toxicology Program and under consideration by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are fully achievable. The institutionalization of robust methods of systematic and transparent review would provide a concrete mechanism for linking science to timely action to prevent harm. Citation: Woodruff TJ, Sutton P. 2014. The Navigation Guide systematic review methodology: a rigorous and transparent method for translating environmental health science into better health outcomes. Environ Health Perspect 122:1007–1014; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1307175 PMID:24968373

Extent and quality of systematic review evidence related to minimum intervention in dentistry: essential oils, powered toothbrushes, triclosan, xylitol.

PubMed

Mickenautsch, Steffen; Yengopal, Veerasamy

2011-08-01

To investigate extent and quality of current systematic review evidence regarding: powered toothbrushes, triclosan toothpaste, essential oil mouthwashes, xylitol chewing gum. Five databases were searched for systematic reviews until 13 November 2010. relevant to topic, systematic review according to title and/or abstract, published in English. Article exclusion criteria were based on QUOROM recommendations for the reporting of systematic review methods. Systematic review quality was judged using the AMSTAR tool. All trials included by reviews were assessed for selection bias. 119 articles were found, of which 11 systematic reviews were included. Of these, six were excluded and five accepted: one for triclosan toothpaste; one for xylitol chewing gum; two for powered toothbrushes; one for essential oil mouthwashes. AMSTAR scores: triclosan toothpaste 7; powered toothbrushes 9 and 11; xylitol chewing gum 9; essential oil mouthwashes 8. In total, 75 (out of 76) reviewed trials were identified. In-depth assessment showed a high risk of selection bias for all trials. The extent of available systematic review evidence is low. Although the few identified systematic reviews could be rated as of medium and high quality, the validity of their conclusions needs to be treated with caution, owing to high risk of selection bias in the reviewed trials. High quality randomised control trials are needed in order to provide convincing evidence regarding true clinical efficacy. © 2011 FDI World Dental Federation.

Text mining for search term development in systematic reviewing: A discussion of some methods and challenges.

PubMed

Stansfield, Claire; O'Mara-Eves, Alison; Thomas, James

2017-09-01

Using text mining to aid the development of database search strings for topics described by diverse terminology has potential benefits for systematic reviews; however, methods and tools for accomplishing this are poorly covered in the research methods literature. We briefly review the literature on applications of text mining for search term development for systematic reviewing. We found that the tools can be used in 5 overarching ways: improving the precision of searches; identifying search terms to improve search sensitivity; aiding the translation of search strategies across databases; searching and screening within an integrated system; and developing objectively derived search strategies. Using a case study and selected examples, we then reflect on the utility of certain technologies (term frequency-inverse document frequency and Termine, term frequency, and clustering) in improving the precision and sensitivity of searches. Challenges in using these tools are discussed. The utility of these tools is influenced by the different capabilities of the tools, the way the tools are used, and the text that is analysed. Increased awareness of how the tools perform facilitates the further development of methods for their use in systematic reviews. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The systematic review team: contributions of the health sciences librarian.

PubMed

Dudden, Rosalind F; Protzko, Shandra L

2011-01-01

While the role of the librarian as an expert searcher in the systematic review process is widely recognized, librarians also can be enlisted to help systematic review teams with other challenges. This article reviews the contributions of librarians to systematic reviews, including communicating methods of the review process, collaboratively formulating the research question and exclusion criteria, formulating the search strategy on a variety of databases, documenting the searches, record keeping, and writing the search methodology. It also discusses challenges encountered such as irregular timelines, providing education, communication, and learning new technologies for record keeping. Rewards include building relationships with researchers, expanding professional expertise, and receiving recognition for contributions to health care outcomes.

Cost-Effectiveness of Social Work Services in Aging: An Updated Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Rizzo, Victoria M.; Rowe, Jeannine M.

2016-01-01

Objectives: This study examines the impact of social work interventions in aging on quality of life (QOL) and cost outcomes in four categories (health, mental health, geriatric evaluation and management, and caregiving). Methods: Systematic review methods are employed. Databases were searched for articles published in English between 2004 and 2012…

Designs and Methods in School Improvement Research: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Feldhoff, Tobias; Radisch, Falk; Bischof, Linda Marie

2016-01-01

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to focus on challenges faced by longitudinal quantitative analyses of school improvement processes and offers a systematic literature review of current papers that use longitudinal analyses. In this context, the authors assessed designs and methods that are used to analyze the relation between school…

A Systematic Review of Methods for Evaluating Rating Quality in Language Assessment

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wind, Stefanie A.; Peterson, Meghan E.

2018-01-01

The use of assessments that require rater judgment (i.e., rater-mediated assessments) has become increasingly popular in high-stakes language assessments worldwide. Using a systematic literature review, the purpose of this study is to identify and explore the dominant methods for evaluating rating quality within the context of research on…

Applying systematic review methods to studies of people's views: an example from public health research.

PubMed

Harden, Angela; Garcia, Jo; Oliver, Sandy; Rees, Rebecca; Shepherd, Jonathan; Brunton, Ginny; Oakley, Ann

2004-09-01

Methods for systematic reviews are well developed for trials, but not for non-experimental or qualitative research. This paper describes the methods developed for reviewing research on people's perspectives and experiences ("views" studies) alongside trials within a series of reviews on young people's mental health, physical activity, and healthy eating. Reports of views studies were difficult to locate; could not easily be classified as "qualitative" or "quantitative"; and often failed to meet seven basic methodological reporting standards used in a newly developed quality assessment tool. Synthesising views studies required the adaptation of qualitative analysis techniques. The benefits of bringing together views studies in a systematic way included gaining a greater breadth of perspectives and a deeper understanding of public health issues from the point of view of those targeted by interventions. A systematic approach also aided reflection on study methods that may distort, misrepresent, or fail to pick up people's views. This methodology is likely to create greater opportunities for people's own perspectives and experiences to inform policies to promote their health.

Applying systematic review methods to studies of people's views: an example from public health research

PubMed Central

Harden, A.; Garcia, J.; Oliver, S.; Rees, R.; Shepherd, J.; Brunton, G.; Oakley, A.

2004-01-01

Methods for systematic reviews are well developed for trials, but not for non-experimental or qualitative research. This paper describes the methods developed for reviewing research on people's perspectives and experiences ("views" studies) alongside trials within a series of reviews on young people's mental health, physical activity, and healthy eating. Reports of views studies were difficult to locate; could not easily be classified as "qualitative" or "quantitative"; and often failed to meet seven basic methodological reporting standards used in a newly developed quality assessment tool. Synthesising views studies required the adaptation of qualitative analysis techniques. The benefits of bringing together views studies in a systematic way included gaining a greater breadth of perspectives and a deeper understanding of public health issues from the point of view of those targeted by interventions. A systematic approach also aided reflection on study methods that may distort, misrepresent, or fail to pick up people's views. This methodology is likely to create greater opportunities for people's own perspectives and experiences to inform policies to promote their health. PMID:15310807

Use of Recommended Search Strategies in Systematic Reviews and the Impact of Librarian Involvement: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Recent Authors

PubMed Central

Koffel, Jonathan B.

2015-01-01

Background Previous research looking at published systematic reviews has shown that their search strategies are often suboptimal and that librarian involvement, though recommended, is low. Confidence in the results, however, is limited due to poor reporting of search strategies the published articles. Objectives To more accurately measure the use of recommended search methods in systematic reviews, the levels of librarian involvement, and whether librarian involvement predicts the use of recommended methods. Methods A survey was sent to all authors of English-language systematic reviews indexed in the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) from January 2012 through January 2014. The survey asked about their use of search methods recommended by the Institute of Medicine, Cochrane Collaboration, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and if and how a librarian was involved in the systematic review. Rates of use of recommended methods and librarian involvement were summarized. The impact of librarian involvement on use of recommended methods was examined using a multivariate logistic regression. Results 1560 authors completed the survey. Use of recommended search methods ranged widely from 98% for use of keywords to 9% for registration in PROSPERO and were generally higher than in previous studies. 51% of studies involved a librarian, but only 64% acknowledge their assistance. Librarian involvement was significantly associated with the use of 65% of recommended search methods after controlling for other potential predictors. Odds ratios ranged from 1.36 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.75) for including multiple languages to 3.07 (95% CI 2.06 to 4.58) for using controlled vocabulary. Conclusions Use of recommended search strategies is higher than previously reported, but many methods are still under-utilized. Librarian involvement predicts the use of most methods, but their involvement is under-reported within the published article. PMID:25938454

The use of GRADE approach in systematic reviews of animal studies.

PubMed

Wei, Dang; Tang, Kun; Wang, Qi; Estill, Janne; Yao, Liang; Wang, Xiaoqin; Chen, Yaolong; Yang, Kehu

2016-03-15

The application of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) in SR of animal studies can promote the translation from bench to bedside. We aim to explore the use of GRADE in systematic reviews of animal studies. We used a theoretical analysis method to explore the use of GRADE in SR of animal studies and applied in a SR of animal studies. Meanwhile, we presented and discussed our results in two international conferences. Five downgrade factors were considered as follows in systematic reviews of animal studies: 1) Risk of bias: the SYRCLE tool can be used for assessing the risk of bias of animal studies. 2) Indirectness: we can assess indirectness in systematic reviews of animal studies from the PICO. 3) Inconsistency: similarity of point estimates, extent of overlap of confidence intervals and statistical heterogeneity are also suitable to evaluate inconsistency of evidence from animal studies. 4) Imprecision: optimal information size (OIS) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are also suitable for systematic reviews of animal studies, like those of clinical trials. 5) Publication bias: we need to consider publication bias comprehensively through the qualitative and quantitative methods. The methods about the use of GRADE in systematic review of animal studies are explicit. However, the principle about GRADE in developing the policy based on the evidence from animal studies when there is an emergency of public health. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Matched Comparison Group Design Standards in Systematic Reviews of Early Childhood Interventions.

PubMed

Thomas, Jaime; Avellar, Sarah A; Deke, John; Gleason, Philip

2017-06-01

Systematic reviews assess the quality of research on program effectiveness to help decision makers faced with many intervention options. Study quality standards specify criteria that studies must meet, including accounting for baseline differences between intervention and comparison groups. We explore two issues related to systematic review standards: covariate choice and choice of estimation method. To help systematic reviews develop/refine quality standards and support researchers in using nonexperimental designs to estimate program effects, we address two questions: (1) How well do variables that systematic reviews typically require studies to account for explain variation in key child and family outcomes? (2) What methods should studies use to account for preexisting differences between intervention and comparison groups? We examined correlations between baseline characteristics and key outcomes using Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort data to address Question 1. For Question 2, we used simulations to compare two methods-matching and regression adjustment-to account for preexisting differences between intervention and comparison groups. A broad range of potential baseline variables explained relatively little of the variation in child and family outcomes. This suggests the potential for bias even after accounting for these variables, highlighting the need for systematic reviews to provide appropriate cautions about interpreting the results of moderately rated, nonexperimental studies. Our simulations showed that regression adjustment can yield unbiased estimates if all relevant covariates are used, even when the model is misspecified, and preexisting differences between the intervention and the comparison groups exist.

Is computer-assisted instruction more effective than other educational methods in achieving ECG competence among medical students and residents? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PubMed

Viljoen, Charle André; Scott Millar, Rob; Engel, Mark E; Shelton, Mary; Burch, Vanessa

2017-12-26

Although ECG interpretation is an essential skill in clinical medicine, medical students and residents often lack ECG competence. Novel teaching methods are increasingly being implemented and investigated to improve ECG training. Computer-assisted instruction is one such method under investigation; however, its efficacy in achieving better ECG competence among medical students and residents remains uncertain. This article describes the protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis that will compare the effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction with other teaching methods used for the ECG training of medical students and residents. Only studies with a comparative research design will be considered. Articles will be searched for in electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Academic Search Premier, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Education Resources Information Center, Africa-Wide Information and Teacher Reference Center). In addition, we will review citation indexes and conduct a grey literature search. Data extraction will be done on articles that met the predefined eligibility criteria. A descriptive analysis of the different teaching modalities will be provided and their educational impact will be assessed in terms of effect size and the modified version of Kirkpatrick framework for the evaluation of educational interventions. This systematic review aims to provide evidence as to whether computer-assisted instruction is an effective teaching modality for ECG training. It is hoped that the information garnered from this systematic review will assist in future curricular development and improve ECG training. As this research is a systematic review of published literature, ethical approval is not required. The results will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement and will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. The protocol and systematic review will be included in a PhD dissertation. CRD42017067054; Pre-results. © 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.

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 interventions. PMID:24416098

A systematic review and critical appraisal of qualitative metasynthetic practice in public health to develop a taxonomy of operations of reciprocal translation.

PubMed

Melendez-Torres, G J; Grant, Sean; Bonell, Chris

2015-12-01

Reciprocal translation, the understanding of one study's findings in terms of another's, is the foundation of most qualitative metasynthetic methods. In light of the proliferation of metasynthesis methods, the current review sought to create a taxonomy of operations of reciprocal translation using recently published qualitative metasyntheses. On 19 August 2013, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO were searched. Included articles were full reports of metasyntheses of qualitative studies published in 2012 in English-language peer-reviewed journals. Two reviewers, working independently, screened records, assessed full texts for inclusion and extracted data on methods from each included metasynthesis. Systematic review methods used were summarised, and metasynthetic methods were inductively analysed to develop the taxonomy. Of 61 included metasyntheses, 21 (34%) reported fully replicable search strategies and 51 (84%) critically appraised included studies. Based on methods in these metasyntheses, we developed a taxonomy of reciprocal translation with four overlapping categories: visual representation; key paper integration; data reduction and thematic extraction; and line-by-line coding. This systematic review presents an update on methods and reporting currently used in qualitative metasynthesis. It also goes beyond the proliferation of approaches to offer a parsimonious approach to understanding how reciprocal translations are accomplished across metasynthetis methods. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 quality of primary studies. The Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews provides a useful method of appraising the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Individual item scores, however, should be examined in addition to total scores, so that significant methodological flaws of systematic reviews are not missed, and results are interpreted appropriately. (348 words).

Impact of Overt and Subclinical Hypothyroidism on Exercise Tolerance: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Lankhaar, Jeannette A. C.; de Vries, Wouter R.; Jansen, Jaap A. C. G.; Zelissen, Pierre M. J.; Backx, Frank J. G.

2014-01-01

Purpose: This systematic review describes the state of the art of the impact of hypothyroidism on exercise tolerance and physical performance capacity in untreated and treated patients with hypothyroidism. Method: A systematic computer-aided search was conducted using biomedical databases. Relevant studies in English, German, and Dutch, published…

A Systematic Method for Search Term Selection in Systematic Reviews

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Thompson, Jenna; Davis, Jacqueline; Mazerolle, Lorraine

2014-01-01

The wide variety of readily available electronic media grants anyone the freedom to retrieve published references from almost any area of research around the world. Despite this privilege, keeping up with primary research evidence is almost impossible because of the increase in professional publishing across disciplines. Systematic reviews are a…

Teaching Reading for Students with Intellectual Disabilities: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Alnahdi, Ghaleb Hamad

2015-01-01

A systematic review of the literature related to instructional strategies to improve reading skills for students with intellectual disabilities was conducted. Studies reviewed were within three categories; early reading approaches, comprehensive approaches, and one method approach. It was concluded that students with intellectual disabilities are…

Use of recommended search strategies in systematic reviews and the impact of librarian involvement: a cross-sectional survey of recent authors.

PubMed

Koffel, Jonathan B

2015-01-01

Previous research looking at published systematic reviews has shown that their search strategies are often suboptimal and that librarian involvement, though recommended, is low. Confidence in the results, however, is limited due to poor reporting of search strategies the published articles. To more accurately measure the use of recommended search methods in systematic reviews, the levels of librarian involvement, and whether librarian involvement predicts the use of recommended methods. A survey was sent to all authors of English-language systematic reviews indexed in the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) from January 2012 through January 2014. The survey asked about their use of search methods recommended by the Institute of Medicine, Cochrane Collaboration, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and if and how a librarian was involved in the systematic review. Rates of use of recommended methods and librarian involvement were summarized. The impact of librarian involvement on use of recommended methods was examined using a multivariate logistic regression. 1560 authors completed the survey. Use of recommended search methods ranged widely from 98% for use of keywords to 9% for registration in PROSPERO and were generally higher than in previous studies. 51% of studies involved a librarian, but only 64% acknowledge their assistance. Librarian involvement was significantly associated with the use of 65% of recommended search methods after controlling for other potential predictors. Odds ratios ranged from 1.36 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.75) for including multiple languages to 3.07 (95% CI 2.06 to 4.58) for using controlled vocabulary. Use of recommended search strategies is higher than previously reported, but many methods are still under-utilized. Librarian involvement predicts the use of most methods, but their involvement is under-reported within the published article.

Changing physician behavior: what works?

PubMed

Mostofian, Fargoi; Ruban, Cynthiya; Simunovic, Nicole; Bhandari, Mohit

2015-01-01

There are various interventions for guideline implementation in clinical practice, but the effects of these interventions are generally unclear. We conducted a systematic review to identify effective methods of implementing clinical research findings and clinical guidelines to change physician practice patterns, in surgical and general practice. Systematic review of reviews. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed) for systematic reviews published in English that evaluated the effectiveness of different implementation methods. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility for inclusion and methodological quality, and extracted relevant data. Fourteen reviews covering a wide range of interventions were identified. The intervention methods used include: audit and feedback, computerized decision support systems, continuing medical education, financial incentives, local opinion leaders, marketing, passive dissemination of information, patient-mediated interventions, reminders, and multifaceted interventions. Active approaches, such as academic detailing, led to greater effects than traditional passive approaches. According to the findings of 3 reviews, 71% of studies included in these reviews showed positive change in physician behavior when exposed to active educational methods and multifaceted interventions. Active forms of continuing medical education and multifaceted interventions were found to be the most effective methods for implementing guidelines into general practice. Additionally, active approaches to changing physician performance were shown to improve practice to a greater extent than traditional passive methods. Further primary research is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of these methods in a surgical setting.

Comparative Effectiveness of Dental Anatomy Carving Pedagogy: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

de Azevedo, Renato de A; da Rosa, Wellington Luiz de O; da Silva, Adriana F; Correa, Marcos B; Torriani, Marcos A; Lund, Rafael G

2015-08-01

The aim of this study was to review the effectiveness of methods used for teaching dental anatomy carving to dental students in operative dentistry as evaluated in published studies. This systematic review is described in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Two independent reviewers performed a systematic literature search of research published from January 1945 until May 2014. Seven databases were screened: MedLine (PubMed), Lilacs, IBECS, Web of Science, Scopus, SciELO, and The Cochrane Library. After removing duplicates, only studies using dental carving to assess the practical knowledge of anatomy were selected. The tabulated data were organized by title of article, names of authors, number of students assessed, assessment method, material used, groups tested, main results, and conclusions. The methodology quality was assessed according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Initially, 2,258 studies were identified in all databases. Five articles met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. According to these studies, the geometric method, teaching step-by-step along with the teacher, and adjuvant methods such as the use of tutors and teaching through digital media with DVDs proved to be effective in improving learning. There is no standard technique that is widely accepted for the teaching of dental carving, nor is there an appropriately validated method of evaluation to verify whether the teaching methods used are effective for the acquisition of skills and expertise in dental anatomy by students.

How effects on health equity are assessed in systematic reviews of interventions.

PubMed

Welch, Vivian; Tugwell, Peter; Petticrew, Mark; de Montigny, Joanne; Ueffing, Erin; Kristjansson, Betsy; McGowan, Jessie; Benkhalti Jandu, Maria; Wells, George A; Brand, Kevin; Smylie, Janet

2010-12-08

Enhancing health equity has now achieved international political importance with endorsement from the World Health Assembly in 2009.  The failure of systematic reviews to consider effects on health equity is cited by decision-makers as a limitation to their ability to inform policy and program decisions.  To systematically review methods to assess effects on health equity in systematic reviews of effectiveness. We searched the following databases up to July 2 2010: MEDLINE, PsychINFO, the Cochrane Methodology Register, CINAHL, Education Resources Information Center, Education Abstracts, Criminal Justice Abstracts, Index to Legal Periodicals, PAIS International, Social Services Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Digital Dissertations and the Health Technology Assessment Database. We searched SCOPUS to identify articles that cited any of the included studies on October 7 2010. We included empirical studies of cohorts of systematic reviews that assessed methods for measuring effects on health inequalities. Data were extracted using a pre-tested form by two independent reviewers. Risk of bias was appraised for included studies according to the potential for bias in selection and detection of systematic reviews.  Thirty-four methodological studies were included.  The methods used by these included studies were: 1) Targeted approaches (n=22); 2) gap approaches (n=12) and gradient approach (n=1).  Gender or sex was assessed in eight out of 34 studies, socioeconomic status in ten studies, race/ethnicity in seven studies, age in seven studies, low and middle income countries in 14 studies, and two studies assessed multiple factors across health inequity may exist.Only three studies provided a definition of health equity. Four methodological approaches to assessing effects on health equity were identified: 1) descriptive assessment of reporting and analysis in systematic reviews (all 34 studies used a type of descriptive method); 2) descriptive assessment of reporting and analysis in original trials (12/34 studies); 3) analytic approaches (10/34 studies); and 4) applicability assessment (11/34 studies). Both analytic and applicability approaches were not reported transparently nor in sufficient detail to judge their credibility. There is a need for improvement in conceptual clarity about the definition of health equity, describing sufficient detail about analytic approaches (including subgroup analyses) and transparent reporting of judgments required for applicability assessments in order to assess and report effects on health equity in systematic reviews.

Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group to play a leading role in guiding the production of informed high-quality, timely research evidence syntheses.

PubMed

Garritty, Chantelle; Stevens, Adrienne; Gartlehner, Gerald; King, Valerie; Kamel, Chris

2016-10-28

Policymakers and healthcare stakeholders are increasingly seeking evidence to inform the policymaking process, and often use existing or commissioned systematic reviews to inform decisions. However, the methodologies that make systematic reviews authoritative take time, typically 1 to 2 years to complete. Outside the traditional SR timeline, "rapid reviews" have emerged as an efficient tool to get evidence to decision-makers more quickly. However, the use of rapid reviews does present challenges. To date, there has been limited published empirical information about this approach to compiling evidence. Thus, it remains a poorly understood and ill-defined set of diverse methodologies with various labels. In recent years, the need to further explore rapid review methods, characteristics, and their use has been recognized by a growing network of healthcare researchers, policymakers, and organizations, several with ties to Cochrane, which is recognized as representing an international gold standard for high-quality, systematic reviews. In this commentary, we introduce the newly established Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group developed to play a leading role in guiding the production of rapid reviews given they are increasingly employed as a research synthesis tool to support timely evidence-informed decision-making. We discuss how the group was formed and outline the group's structure and remit. We also discuss the need to establish a more robust evidence base for rapid reviews in the published literature, and the importance of promoting registration of rapid review protocols in an effort to promote efficiency and transparency in research. As with standard systematic reviews, the core principles of evidence-based synthesis should apply to rapid reviews in order to minimize bias to the extent possible. The Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group will serve to establish a network of rapid review stakeholders and provide a forum for discussion and training. By facilitating exchange, the group will strive to conduct research to advance the methods of rapid reviews.

Systematic reviews of animal studies; missing link in translational research?

PubMed

van Luijk, Judith; Bakker, Brenda; Rovers, Maroeska M; Ritskes-Hoitinga, Merel; de Vries, Rob B M; Leenaars, Marlies

2014-01-01

The methodological quality of animal studies is an important factor hampering the translation of results from animal studies to a clinical setting. Systematic reviews of animal studies may provide a suitable method to assess and thereby improve their methodological quality. The aims of this study were: 1) to evaluate the risk of bias assessment in animal-based systematic reviews, and 2) to study the internal validity of the primary animal studies included in these systematic reviews. We systematically searched Pubmed and Embase for SRs of preclinical animal studies published between 2005 and 2012. A total of 91 systematic reviews met our inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was assessed in 48 (52.7%) of these 91 systematic reviews. Thirty-three (36.3%) SRs provided sufficient information to evaluate the internal validity of the included studies. Of the evaluated primary studies, 24.6% was randomized, 14.6% reported blinding of the investigator/caretaker, 23.9% blinded the outcome assessment, and 23.1% reported drop-outs. To improve the translation of animal data to clinical practice, systematic reviews of animal studies are worthwhile, but the internal validity of primary animal studies needs to be improved. Furthermore, risk of bias should be assessed by systematic reviews of animal studies to provide insight into the reliability of the available evidence.

Systematically reviewing and synthesizing evidence from conversation analytic and related discursive research to inform healthcare communication practice and policy: an illustrated guide

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Background Healthcare delivery is largely accomplished in and through conversations between people, and healthcare quality and effectiveness depend enormously upon the communication practices employed within these conversations. An important body of evidence about these practices has been generated by conversation analysis and related discourse analytic approaches, but there has been very little systematic reviewing of this evidence. Methods We developed an approach to reviewing evidence from conversation analytic and related discursive research through the following procedures: • reviewing existing systematic review methods and our own prior experience of applying these • clarifying distinctive features of conversation analytic and related discursive work which must be taken into account when reviewing • holding discussions within a review advisory team that included members with expertise in healthcare research, conversation analytic research, and systematic reviewing • attempting and then refining procedures through conducting an actual review which examined evidence about how people talk about difficult future issues including illness progression and dying Results We produced a step-by-step guide which we describe here in terms of eight stages, and which we illustrate from our ‘Review of Future Talk’. The guide incorporates both established procedures for systematic reviewing, and new techniques designed for working with conversation analytic evidence. Conclusions The guide is designed to inform systematic reviews of conversation analytic and related discursive evidence on specific domains and topics. Whilst we designed it for reviews that aim at informing healthcare practice and policy, it is flexible and could be used for reviews with other aims, for instance those aiming to underpin research programmes and projects. We advocate systematically reviewing conversation analytic and related discursive findings using this approach in order to translate them into a form that is credible and useful to healthcare practitioners, educators and policy-makers. PMID:23721181

Systematic reviews identify important methodological flaws in stroke rehabilitation therapy primary studies: review of reviews.

PubMed

Santaguida, Pasqualina; Oremus, Mark; Walker, Kathryn; Wishart, Laurie R; Siegel, Karen Lohmann; Raina, Parminder

2012-04-01

A "review of reviews" was undertaken to assess methodological issues in studies evaluating nondrug rehabilitation interventions in stroke patients. MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from January 2000 to January 2008 within the stroke rehabilitation setting. Electronic searches were supplemented by reviews of reference lists and citations identified by experts. Eligible studies were systematic reviews; excluded citations were narrative reviews or reviews of reviews. Review characteristics and criteria for assessing methodological quality of primary studies within them were extracted. The search yielded 949 English-language citations. We included a final set of 38 systematic reviews. Cochrane reviews, which have a standardized methodology, were generally of higher methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews. Most systematic reviews used standardized quality assessment criteria for primary studies, but not all were comprehensive. Reviews showed that primary studies had problems with randomization, allocation concealment, and blinding. Baseline comparability, adverse events, and co-intervention or contamination were not consistently assessed. Blinding of patients and providers was often not feasible and was not evaluated as a source of bias. The eligible systematic reviews identified important methodological flaws in the evaluated primary studies, suggesting the need for improvement of research methods and reporting. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Giardiasis as a neglected disease in Brazil: Systematic review of 20 years of publications

PubMed Central

Durigan, Maurício; Leal, Diego Averaldo Guiguet; Schneider, Adriano de Bernardi; Franco, Regina Maura Bueno; Singer, Steven M.

2017-01-01

Introduction Giardiasis is an intestinal infection that affects more than two hundred million people annually worldwide; it is caused by the flagellated protozoan Giardia duodenalis. In tropical countries and in low or middle-income settings, like Brazil, its prevalence can be high. There is currently no systematic review on the presence of G. duodenalis in patients, animals or water sources in Brazil. Methods This systematic review was performed according to recommendations established by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). As databases for our searches, we have used PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Brazilian database SciELO using the keywords Giardia* and Brazil. Results This systematic review identified research studies related to G. duodenalis in water, giardiasis in animals, prevalence of giardiasis across Brazilian regions, genotyping of strains isolated in humans, and giardiasis in indigenous populations. We also propose a network of G. duodenalis transmission in Brazil based on genotypes analyses. Conclusion This is the first time within the last twenty years that a review is being published on the occurrence of G. duodenalis in Brazil, addressing relevant issues such as prevalence, molecular epidemiology and analytical methods for parasite detection. PMID:29065126

Systematic reviews, overviews of reviews and comparative effectiveness reviews: a discussion of approaches to knowledge synthesis.

PubMed

Hartling, Lisa; Vandermeer, Ben; Fernandes, Ricardo M

2014-06-01

The Cochrane Collaboration has been at the forefront of developing methods for knowledge synthesis internationally. We discuss three approaches to synthesize evidence for healthcare interventions: systematic reviews (SRs), overviews of reviews and comparative effectiveness reviews. We illustrate these approaches with examples from knowledge syntheses on interventions for bronchiolitis, a common acute paediatric condition. Some of the differences among these approaches are subtle and methods are not necessarily mutually exclusive to a single review type. Systematic reviews bring together evidence from multiple studies in a rigorous fashion for a single intervention or group of interventions. Systematic reviews, as they have developed within healthcare, often focus on single or select interventions and direct pairwise comparisons; therefore, end-users may need to read several individual SRs to inform decision making. Overviews of reviews compile information from multiple SRs relevant to a single health problem. Overviews provide the end-user with a quick overview of the available evidence; however, overviews are dependent on the methods and decisions employed at the SR level. Furthermore, overviews do not often integrate evidence from different SRs quantitatively. Comparative effectiveness reviews, as we define them here, synthesize relevant evidence from individual studies to describe the relative benefits (or harms) of a range of interventions. Comparative effectiveness reviews may use statistical methods (network meta-analysis) to incorporate direct and indirect evidence; therefore, they can provide stronger inferences about the relative effectiveness (or safety) of interventions. While potentially more expensive and time-consuming to produce, a comparative effectiveness review provides a synthesis of a range of interventions for a given condition and the relative efficacy across interventions using consistent and standardized methodology. Copyright © 2014 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Effectiveness of Computer-Aid, Self-Instructional Programs in Dental Education: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Rosenberg, Harold; Grad, Helen A.; Matear, David W.

2003-01-01

Performed a systematic review of the published literature comparing computer-aided learning (CAL) with other teaching methods in dental education. Concluded that CAL is as effective as other methods of teaching and can be used as an adjunct to traditional education or as a means of self-instruction. (EV)

Systematic Review of Instructional Methods to Teach Employment Skills to Secondary Students with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gilson, Carly B.; Carter, Erik W.; Biggs, Elizabeth E.

2017-01-01

Effective vocational instruction is an essential aspect of preparing students with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) for the world of work. We systematically reviewed research on instructional methods used to teach employment skills to secondary students with IDD. We identified 56 studies involving 766 participants with IDD. Four…

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Predictors of Expressive-Language Outcomes among Late Talkers

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Fisher, Evelyn L.

2017-01-01

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the literature on predictors of outcomes among late talkers using systematic review and meta-analysis methods. We sought to answer the question: What factors predict preschool-age expressive-language outcomes among late-talking toddlers? Method: We entered carefully selected search terms into the…

Factor Analysis Methods and Validity Evidence: A Systematic Review of Instrument Development across the Continuum of Medical Education

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wetzel, Angela Payne

2011-01-01

Previous systematic reviews indicate a lack of reporting of reliability and validity evidence in subsets of the medical education literature. Psychology and general education reviews of factor analysis also indicate gaps between current and best practices; yet, a comprehensive review of exploratory factor analysis in instrument development across…

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…

Fidelity in After-School Program Intervention Research: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Maynard, Brandy R.; Peters, Kristen E.; Vaughn, Michael G.; Sarteschi, Christine M.

2013-01-01

Objective: This study examined whether and to what extent researchers addressed intervention fidelity in research of after-school programs serving at-risk students. Method: Systematic review procedures were used to search, retrieve, select, and analyze studies for this review. Fifty-five intervention studies were assessed on the following…

Family Adjustment to Childhood Cancer: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Long, Kristin A.; Marsland, Anna L.

2011-01-01

This systematic review integrates qualitative and quantitative research findings regarding family changes in the context of childhood cancer. Twenty-eight quantitative, 42 qualitative, and one mixed-method studies were reviewed. Included studies focused on family functioning, marital quality, and/or parenting in the context of pediatric cancer,…

Changing Heterosexuals' Attitudes toward Homosexuals: A Systematic Review of the Empirical Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Tucker, Edmon W.; Potocky-Tripodi, Miriam

2006-01-01

Objective: This article systematically reviews evidence for interventions that change attitudes toward homosexuals. Method: In all, 17 empirical studies using college and/or university student samples and interventions intended to improve heterosexuals' attitudes toward lesbian, gay, or bisexual individuals are reviewed. Characteristics of the…

Capturing Public Opinion on Public Health Topics: A Comparison of Experiences from a Systematic Review, Focus Group Study, and Analysis of Online, User-Generated Content.

PubMed

Giles, Emma Louise; Adams, Jean M

2015-01-01

Capturing public opinion toward public health topics is important to ensure that services, policy, and research are aligned with the beliefs and priorities of the general public. A number of approaches can be used to capture public opinion. We are conducting a program of work on the effectiveness and acceptability of health promoting financial incentive interventions. We have captured public opinion on financial incentive interventions using three methods: a systematic review, focus group study, and analysis of online user-generated comments to news media reports. In this short editorial-style piece, we compare and contrast our experiences with these three methods. Each of these methods had their advantages and disadvantages. Advantages include tailoring of the research question for systematic reviews, probing of answers during focus groups, and the ability to aggregate a large data set using online user-generated content. However, disadvantages include needing to update systematic reviews, participants conforming to a dominant perspective in focus groups, and being unable to collect respondent characteristics during analysis of user-generated online content. That said, analysis of user-generated online content offers additional time and resource advantages, and we found it elicited similar findings to those obtained via more traditional methods, such as systematic reviews and focus groups. A number of methods for capturing public opinions on public health topics are available. Public health researchers, policy makers, and practitioners should choose methods appropriate to their aims. Analysis of user-generated online content, especially in the context of news media reports, may be a quicker and cheaper alternative to more traditional methods, without compromising on the breadth of opinions captured.

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

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.

Cost-effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening and Treatment Methods: Mapping of Systematic Reviews.

PubMed

Abdolahi, Hossein Mashhadi; Asiabar, Ali Sarabi; Azami-Aghdash, Saber; Pournaghi-Azar, Fatemeh; Rezapour, Aziz

2018-01-01

Due to extensive literature on colorectal cancer and their heterogeneous results, this study aimed to summarize the systematic reviews which review the cost-effectiveness studies on different aspects of colorectal cancer. The required data were collected by searching the following key words according to MeSH: "colorectal cancer," "colorectal oncology," "colorectal carcinoma," "colorectal neoplasm," "colorectal tumors," "cost-effectiveness," "systematic review," and "meta-analysis." The following databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Two reviewers evaluated the articles according to the checklist of "assessment of multiple systematic reviews" (AMSTAR) tool. Finally, eight systematic reviews were included in the study. The Drummond checklist was mostly used for assessing the quality of the articles. The main perspective was related to the payer and the least was relevant to the social. The majority of the cases referred to sensitivity analysis (in 76% of the cases) and the lowest point also was allocated to discounting (in 37% of cases). The Markov model was used most widely in the studies. Treatment methods examined in the studies were not cost-effective in comparison with the studied units. Among the screening methods, computerized tomographic colonography and fecal DNA were cost-effective. The average score of the articles' qualities was high (9.8 out of 11). The community perspective should be taken into consideration at large in the studies. It is necessary to pay more attention to discounting subject in studies. More frequent application of the Markov model is recommended.

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).

The Navigation Guide systematic review methodology: a rigorous and transparent method for translating environmental health science into better health outcomes.

PubMed

Woodruff, Tracey J; Sutton, Patrice

2014-10-01

Synthesizing what is known about the environmental drivers of health is instrumental to taking prevention-oriented action. Methods of research synthesis commonly used in environmental health lag behind systematic review methods developed in the clinical sciences over the past 20 years. We sought to develop a proof of concept of the "Navigation Guide," a systematic and transparent method of research synthesis in environmental health. The Navigation Guide methodology builds on best practices in research synthesis in evidence-based medicine and environmental health. Key points of departure from current methods of expert-based narrative review prevalent in environmental health include a prespecified protocol, standardized and transparent documentation including expert judgment, a comprehensive search strategy, assessment of "risk of bias," and separation of the science from values and preferences. Key points of departure from evidence-based medicine include assigning a "moderate" quality rating to human observational studies and combining diverse evidence streams. The Navigation Guide methodology is a systematic and rigorous approach to research synthesis that has been developed to reduce bias and maximize transparency in the evaluation of environmental health information. Although novel aspects of the method will require further development and validation, our findings demonstrated that improved methods of research synthesis under development at the National Toxicology Program and under consideration by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are fully achievable. The institutionalization of robust methods of systematic and transparent review would provide a concrete mechanism for linking science to timely action to prevent harm.

Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: The PRISMA-DTA Statement.

PubMed

McInnes, Matthew D F; Moher, David; Thombs, Brett D; McGrath, Trevor A; Bossuyt, Patrick M; Clifford, Tammy; Cohen, Jérémie F; Deeks, Jonathan J; Gatsonis, Constantine; Hooft, Lotty; Hunt, Harriet A; Hyde, Christopher J; Korevaar, Daniël A; Leeflang, Mariska M G; Macaskill, Petra; Reitsma, Johannes B; Rodin, Rachel; Rutjes, Anne W S; Salameh, Jean-Paul; Stevens, Adrienne; Takwoingi, Yemisi; Tonelli, Marcello; Weeks, Laura; Whiting, Penny; Willis, Brian H

2018-01-23

Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy synthesize data from primary diagnostic studies that have evaluated the accuracy of 1 or more index tests against a reference standard, provide estimates of test performance, allow comparisons of the accuracy of different tests, and facilitate the identification of sources of variability in test accuracy. To develop the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagnostic test accuracy guideline as a stand-alone extension of the PRISMA statement. Modifications to the PRISMA statement reflect the specific requirements for reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy studies and the abstracts for these reviews. Established standards from the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) Network were followed for the development of the guideline. The original PRISMA statement was used as a framework on which to modify and add items. A group of 24 multidisciplinary experts used a systematic review of articles on existing reporting guidelines and methods, a 3-round Delphi process, a consensus meeting, pilot testing, and iterative refinement to develop the PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy guideline. The final version of the PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy guideline checklist was approved by the group. The systematic review (produced 64 items) and the Delphi process (provided feedback on 7 proposed items; 1 item was later split into 2 items) identified 71 potentially relevant items for consideration. The Delphi process reduced these to 60 items that were discussed at the consensus meeting. Following the meeting, pilot testing and iterative feedback were used to generate the 27-item PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy checklist. To reflect specific or optimal contemporary systematic review methods for diagnostic test accuracy, 8 of the 27 original PRISMA items were left unchanged, 17 were modified, 2 were added, and 2 were omitted. The 27-item PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy checklist provides specific guidance for reporting of systematic reviews. The PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy guideline can facilitate the transparent reporting of reviews, and may assist in the evaluation of validity and applicability, enhance replicability of reviews, and make the results from systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies more useful.

The Effects of Oral-Motor Exercises on Swallowing in Children: An Evidence-Based Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Arvedson, Joan; Clark, Heather; Lazarus, Cathy; Schooling, Tracy; Frymark, Tobi

2010-01-01

Aim: The aim of this unregistered evidence-based systematic review was to determine the state and quality of evidence on the effects of oral motor exercises (OME) on swallowing physiology, pulmonary health, functional swallowing outcomes, and drooling management in children with swallowing disorders. Method: A systematic search of 20 electronic…

Falls Prevention Education for Older Adults during and after Hospitalization: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Lee, Den-Ching A.; Pritchard, Elizabeth; McDermott, Fiona; Haines, Terry P.

2014-01-01

Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of patient education in reducing falls, promoting behavioural change and the uptake of prevention activities in older adults during and after hospitalization. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic search of five health science databases was performed up to November 2012. Studies…

Evidence-Based Systematic Review: Effects of Oral Motor Interventions on Feeding and Swallowing in Preterm Infants

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Arvedson, Joan; Clark, Heather; Lazarus, Cathy; Schooling, Tracy; Frymark, Tobi

2010-01-01

Purpose: To conduct an evidence-based systematic review and provide an estimate of the effects of oral motor interventions (OMIs) on feeding/swallowing outcomes (both physiological and functional) and pulmonary health in preterm infants. Method: A systematic search of the literature published from 1960 to 2007 was conducted. Articles meeting the…

Impact of Environmental Factors on Community Participation of Persons with an Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Verdonschot, Manon M. L.; de Witte, L. P.; Reichrath, E.; Buntinx, W. H. E.; Curfs, L. M. G.

2009-01-01

Study Design: A systematic review of the literature. Objectives: To describe which environmental factors have an impact on community participation of persons with an intellectual disability. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted for the period of 1996-2006 in Pubmed, CINAHL and PSYCINFO. Search terms were derived from the…

Job Satisfaction, Quality of Work Life and Work Motivation in Employees with Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Kocman, Andreas; Weber, Germain

2018-01-01

Background: Current research on employment options for people with Intellectual Disability emphasizes the importance of employee needs and satisfaction. The study aims at systematically reviewing the literature on job satisfaction and related constructs. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted. Studies were included if (i) they are…

A nephrology guide to reading and using systematic reviews of randomized trials.

PubMed

Badve, Sunil V; Palmer, Suetonia C; Johnson, David W; Strippoli, Giovanni F M

2015-06-01

Conscientious integration of the best available evidence in the care of an individual patient could be challenging for a busy clinician. A well-conducted systematic review can adequately inform not only the clinicians, but also the policy makers and researchers about the benefits and risks of a particular intervention. In this article, we describe how to critically appraise the methods and interpret the results of a systematic review of interventional trials and apply the findings of a systematic review to the clinical questions. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved.

Early Interventions Following the Death of a Parent: Protocol of a Mixed Methods Systematic Review.

PubMed

Pereira, Mariana; Johnsen, Iren; Hauken, May Aa; Kristensen, Pål; Dyregrov, Atle

2017-06-29

Previous meta-analyses examined the effectiveness of interventions for bereaved children showing small to moderate effect sizes. However, no mixed methods systematic review was conducted on bereavement interventions following the loss of a parent focusing on the time since death in regard to the prevention of grief complications. The overall purpose of the review is to provide a rigorous synthesis of early intervention after parental death in childhood. Specifically, the aims are twofold: (1) to determine the rationales, contents, timeframes, and outcomes of early bereavement care interventions for children and/or their parents and (2) to assess the quality of current early intervention studies. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods intervention studies that start intervention with parentally bereaved children (and/or their parents) up to 6 months postloss will be included in the review. The search strategy was based on the Population, Interventions, Comparator, Outcomes, and Study Designs (PICOS) approach, and it was devised together with a university librarian. The literature searches will be carried out in the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), PsycINFO, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool will be used to appraise the quality of eligible studies. All data will be narratively synthetized following the Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews. The systematic review is ongoing and the data search has started. The review is expected to be completed by the end of 2017. Findings will be submitted to leading journals for publication. In accordance with the current diagnostic criteria for prolonged grief as well as the users' perspectives literature, this systematic review outlines a possible sensitive period for early intervention following the death of a parent. The hereby presented protocol ensures the groundwork and transparency for the process of conducting the systematic review. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42017064077; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42017064077 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6rMq6F0fv). ©Mariana Pereira, Iren Johnsen, May Aa Hauken, Pål Kristensen, Atle Dyregrov. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 29.06.2017.

Convergent and sequential synthesis designs: implications for conducting and reporting systematic reviews of qualitative and quantitative evidence.

PubMed

Hong, Quan Nha; Pluye, Pierre; Bujold, Mathieu; Wassef, Maggy

2017-03-23

Systematic reviews of qualitative and quantitative evidence can provide a rich understanding of complex phenomena. This type of review is increasingly popular, has been used to provide a landscape of existing knowledge, and addresses the types of questions not usually covered in reviews relying solely on either quantitative or qualitative evidence. Although several typologies of synthesis designs have been developed, none have been tested on a large sample of reviews. The aim of this review of reviews was to identify and develop a typology of synthesis designs and methods that have been used and to propose strategies for synthesizing qualitative and quantitative evidence. A review of systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence was performed. Six databases were searched from inception to December 2014. Reviews were included if they were systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence. The included reviews were analyzed according to three concepts of synthesis processes: (a) synthesis methods, (b) sequence of data synthesis, and (c) integration of data and synthesis results. A total of 459 reviews were included. The analysis of this literature highlighted a lack of transparency in reporting how evidence was synthesized and a lack of consistency in the terminology used. Two main types of synthesis designs were identified: convergent and sequential synthesis designs. Within the convergent synthesis design, three subtypes were found: (a) data-based convergent synthesis design, where qualitative and quantitative evidence is analyzed together using the same synthesis method, (b) results-based convergent synthesis design, where qualitative and quantitative evidence is analyzed separately using different synthesis methods and results of both syntheses are integrated during a final synthesis, and (c) parallel-results convergent synthesis design consisting of independent syntheses of qualitative and quantitative evidence and an interpretation of the results in the discussion. Performing systematic reviews of qualitative and quantitative evidence is challenging because of the multiple synthesis options. The findings provide guidance on how to combine qualitative and quantitative evidence. Also, recommendations are made to improve the conducting and reporting of this type of review.

What methods do reviews of normative ethics literature use for search, selection, analysis, and synthesis? In-depth results from a systematic review of reviews.

PubMed

Mertz, Marcel; Strech, Daniel; Kahrass, Hannes

2017-12-19

(Semi-)systematic approaches to finding, analysing, and synthesising ethics literature on medical topics are still in their infancy. However, our recent systematic review showed that the rate of publication of such (semi-)systematic reviews has increased in the last two decades. This is not only true for reviews of empirical ethics literature, but also for reviews of normative ethics literature. In the latter case, there is currently little in the way of standards and guidance available. Therefore, the methods and reporting strategies of such reviews vary greatly. The purpose of the follow-up study we present was to obtain deeper methodological insight into the ways reviews of normative literature are actually conducted and to analyse the methods used. Our search in the PubMed, PhilPapers, and Google Scholar databases led to the identification of 183 reviews of ethics literature published between 1997 and 2015, of which 84 were identified as reviews of normative and mixed literature. Qualitative content analysis was used to extract and synthesise descriptions of search, selection, quality appraisal, analysis, and synthesis methods. We further assessed quantitatively how often certain methods (e.g. search strategies, data analysis procedures) were used by the reviews. The overall reporting quality varies among the analysed reviews and was generally poor even for major criteria regarding the search and selection of literature. For example, only 24 (29%) used a PRISMA flowchart. Also, only 55 (66%) reviews mentioned the information unit they sought to extract, and 12 (14%) stated an ethical approach as the theoretical basis for the analysis. Interpretable information on the synthesis method was given by 47 (60%); the most common methods applied were qualitative methods commonly used in social science research (83%). Reviews which fail to provide sufficient relevant information to readers have reduced methodological transparency regardless of actual methodological quality. In order to increase the internal validity (i.e. reproducibility) as well as the external validity (i.e. utility for the intended audience) of future reviews of normative literature, we suggest more accurate reporting regarding the goal of the review, the definition of the information unit, the ethical approach used, and technical aspects.

Is the coverage of google scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Background In searches for clinical trials and systematic reviews, it is said that Google Scholar (GS) should never be used in isolation, but in addition to PubMed, Cochrane, and other trusted sources of information. We therefore performed a study to assess the coverage of GS specifically for the studies included in systematic reviews and evaluate if GS was sensitive enough to be used alone for systematic reviews. Methods All the original studies included in 29 systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Database Syst Rev or in the JAMA in 2009 were gathered in a gold standard database. GS was searched for all these studies one by one to assess the percentage of studies which could have been identified by searching only GS. Results All the 738 original studies included in the gold standard database were retrieved in GS (100%). Conclusion The coverage of GS for the studies included in the systematic reviews is 100%. If the authors of the 29 systematic reviews had used only GS, no reference would have been missed. With some improvement in the research options, to increase its precision, GS could become the leading bibliographic database in medicine and could be used alone for systematic reviews. PMID:23302542

Searching for the Impact of Participation in Health and Health Research: Challenges and Methods.

PubMed

Harris, Janet; Cook, Tina; Gibbs, Lisa; Oetzel, John; Salsberg, Jon; Shinn, Carolynne; Springett, Jane; Wallerstein, Nina; Wright, Michael

2018-01-01

Internationally, the interest in involving patients and the public in designing and delivering health interventions and researching their effectiveness is increasing. Several systematic reviews of participation in health research have recently been completed, which note a number of challenges in documenting the impact of participation. Challenges include working across stakeholders with different understandings of participation and levels of experience in reviewing; comparing heterogeneous populations and contexts; configuring findings from often thin descriptions of participation in academic papers; and dealing with different definitions of impact. This paper aims to advance methods for systematically reviewing the impact of participation in health research, drawing on recent systematic review guidance. Practical examples for dealing with issues at each stage of a review are provided based on recent experience. Recommendations for improving primary research on participation in health are offered and key points to consider during the review are summarised.

Searching for the Impact of Participation in Health and Health Research: Challenges and Methods

PubMed Central

Cook, Tina; Salsberg, Jon; Shinn, Carolynne; Springett, Jane; Wallerstein, Nina; Wright, Michael

2018-01-01

Internationally, the interest in involving patients and the public in designing and delivering health interventions and researching their effectiveness is increasing. Several systematic reviews of participation in health research have recently been completed, which note a number of challenges in documenting the impact of participation. Challenges include working across stakeholders with different understandings of participation and levels of experience in reviewing; comparing heterogeneous populations and contexts; configuring findings from often thin descriptions of participation in academic papers; and dealing with different definitions of impact. This paper aims to advance methods for systematically reviewing the impact of participation in health research, drawing on recent systematic review guidance. Practical examples for dealing with issues at each stage of a review are provided based on recent experience. Recommendations for improving primary research on participation in health are offered and key points to consider during the review are summarised. PMID:29862298

Development and pilot test of a process to identify research needs from a systematic review.

PubMed

Saldanha, Ian J; Wilson, Lisa M; Bennett, Wendy L; Nicholson, Wanda K; Robinson, Karen A

2013-05-01

To ensure appropriate allocation of research funds, we need methods for identifying high-priority research needs. We developed and pilot tested a process to identify needs for primary clinical research using a systematic review in gestational diabetes mellitus. We conducted eight steps: abstract research gaps from a systematic review using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Settings (PICOS) framework; solicit feedback from the review authors; translate gaps into researchable questions using the PICOS framework; solicit feedback from multidisciplinary stakeholders at our institution; establish consensus among multidisciplinary external stakeholders on the importance of the research questions using the Delphi method; prioritize outcomes; develop conceptual models to highlight research needs; and evaluate the process. We identified 19 research questions. During the Delphi method, external stakeholders established consensus for 16 of these 19 questions (15 with "high" and 1 with "medium" clinical benefit/importance). We pilot tested an eight-step process to identify clinically important research needs. Before wider application of this process, it should be tested using systematic reviews of other diseases. Further evaluation should include assessment of the usefulness of the research needs generated using this process for primary researchers and funders. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Utilising Virtual Reality in Alcohol Studies: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Durl, James; Dietrich, Timo; Pang, Bo; Potter, Leigh-Ellen; Carter, Lewis

2018-01-01

Background: The resurgence of interest in virtual reality (VR) in recent years has been exciting for health educators and researchers, yet little is known about VR's effectiveness. This systematic literature review aims to provide an overview of the prevalence of VR in alcohol studies and assess its effectiveness. Methods: Peer-reviewed articles…

Barriers to the Uptake of Eye Care Services in Developing Countries: A Systematic Review of Interventions

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Abdullah, Khadija Nowaira; Al-Sharqi, Omar Zayan; Abdullah, Muhammad Tanweer

2013-01-01

Objective: This research identifies effective and ineffective interventions for reducing barriers to the uptake of eye care services in developing countries. Design: Systematic literature review. Setting: Only research studies done in developing countries were included. Method: The review is restricted to English-language articles published…

Stress in Caregivers of Individuals with Intellectual or Developmental Disabilities: A Systematic Review of Mindfulness-Based Interventions

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Ó Donnchadha, Seán

2018-01-01

Background: The efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) for stress and psychological distress in professional caregivers supporting individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities (IDDs) is reviewed. Methods: Eight studies met inclusion criteria and were systematically reviewed, including RCTs and single-group designs.…

Auditory Processing Disorder and Auditory/Language Interventions: An Evidence-Based Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Fey, Marc E.; Richard, Gail J.; Geffner, Donna; Kamhi, Alan G.; Medwetsky, Larry; Paul, Diane; Ross-Swain, Deborah; Wallach, Geraldine P.; Frymark, Tobi; Schooling, Tracy

2011-01-01

Purpose: In this systematic review, the peer-reviewed literature on the efficacy of interventions for school-age children with auditory processing disorder (APD) is critically evaluated. Method: Searches of 28 electronic databases yielded 25 studies for analysis. These studies were categorized by research phase (e.g., exploratory, efficacy) and…

A Systematic Review of Interventions Used to Treat Catatonic Symptoms in People with Autistic Spectrum Disorders

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

DeJong, Hannah; Bunton, Penny; Hare, Dougal J.

2014-01-01

A systematic review was conducted to examine the efficacy of a range of treatments for autistic catatonia. The review identified 22 relevant papers, reporting a total of 28 cases including both adult and paediatric patients. Treatment methods included electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), medication, behavioural and sensory interventions. Quality…

Web-Based Training Methods for Behavioral Health Providers: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Jackson, Carrie B; Quetsch, Lauren B; Brabson, Laurel A; Herschell, Amy D

2018-07-01

There has been an increase in the use of web-based training methods to train behavioral health providers in evidence-based practices. This systematic review focuses solely on the efficacy of web-based training methods for training behavioral health providers. A literature search yielded 45 articles meeting inclusion criteria. Results indicated that the serial instruction training method was the most commonly studied web-based training method. While the current review has several notable limitations, findings indicate that participating in a web-based training may result in greater post-training knowledge and skill, in comparison to baseline scores. Implications and recommendations for future research on web-based training methods are discussed.

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 Cochrane Collaboration. Encouragingly, almost half of the authors would consider converting their review to Cochrane format. Based on the current number of reviews in the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, this could result in more than 700 additional Cochrane reviews. Ways of supporting these authors and how to provide dedicated time to convert systematic reviews needs further consideration. PMID:12533194

Node-making process in network meta-analysis of nonpharmacological treatment are poorly reported.

PubMed

James, Arthur; Yavchitz, Amélie; Ravaud, Philippe; Boutron, Isabelle

2018-05-01

To identify methods to support the node-making process in network meta-analyses (NMAs) of nonpharmacological treatments. We proceeded in two stages. First, we conducted a literature review of guidelines and methodological articles about NMAs to identify methods proposed to lump interventions into nodes. Second, we conducted a systematic review of NMAs of nonpharmacological treatments to extract methods used by authors to support their node-making process. MEDLINE and Google Scholar were searched to identify articles assessing NMA guidelines or methodology intended for NMA authors. MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched to identify reports of NMAs including at least one nonpharmacological treatment. Both searches involved articles available from database inception to March 2016. From the methodological review, we identified and extracted methods proposed to lump interventions into nodes. From the systematic review, the reporting of the network was assessed as long as the method described supported the node-making process. Among the 116 articles retrieved in the literature review, 12 (10%) discussed the concept of lumping or splitting interventions in NMAs. No consensual method was identified during the methodological review, and expert consensus was the only method proposed to support the node-making process. Among 5187 references for the systematic review, we included 110 reports of NMAs published between 2007 and 2016. The nodes were described in the introduction section of 88 reports (80%), which suggested that the node content might have been a priori decided before the systematic review. Nine reports (8.1%) described a specific process or justification to build nodes for the network. Two methods were identified: (1) fit a previously published classification and (2) expert consensus. Despite the importance of NMA in the delivery of evidence when several interventions are available for a single indication, recommendations on the reporting of the node-making process in NMAs are lacking, and reporting of the node-making process in NMAs seems insufficient. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

A comparison of two search methods for determining the scope of systematic reviews and health technology assessments.

PubMed

Forsetlund, Louise; Kirkehei, Ingvild; Harboe, Ingrid; Odgaard-Jensen, Jan

2012-01-01

This study aims to compare two different search methods for determining the scope of a requested systematic review or health technology assessment. The first method (called the Direct Search Method) included performing direct searches in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and the Health Technology Assessments (HTA). Using the comparison method (called the NHS Search Engine) we performed searches by means of the search engine of the British National Health Service, NHS Evidence. We used an adapted cross-over design with a random allocation of fifty-five requests for systematic reviews. The main analyses were based on repeated measurements adjusted for the order in which the searches were conducted. The Direct Search Method generated on average fewer hits (48 percent [95 percent confidence interval {CI} 6 percent to 72 percent], had a higher precision (0.22 [95 percent CI, 0.13 to 0.30]) and more unique hits than when searching by means of the NHS Search Engine (50 percent [95 percent CI, 7 percent to 110 percent]). On the other hand, the Direct Search Method took longer (14.58 minutes [95 percent CI, 7.20 to 21.97]) and was perceived as somewhat less user-friendly than the NHS Search Engine (-0.60 [95 percent CI, -1.11 to -0.09]). Although the Direct Search Method had some drawbacks such as being more time-consuming and less user-friendly, it generated more unique hits than the NHS Search Engine, retrieved on average fewer references and fewer irrelevant results.

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center methods for systematically reviewing complex multicomponent health care interventions.

PubMed

Guise, Jeanne-Marie; Chang, Christine; Viswanathan, Meera; Glick, Susan; Treadwell, Jonathan; Umscheid, Craig A; Whitlock, Evelyn; Fu, Rongwei; Berliner, Elise; Paynter, Robin; Anderson, Johanna; Motu'apuaka, Pua; Trikalinos, Tom

2014-11-01

The purpose of this Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center methods white paper was to outline approaches to conducting systematic reviews of complex multicomponent health care interventions. We performed a literature scan and conducted semistructured interviews with international experts who conduct research or systematic reviews of complex multicomponent interventions (CMCIs) or organizational leaders who implement CMCIs in health care. Challenges identified include lack of consistent terminology for such interventions (eg, complex, multicomponent, multidimensional, multifactorial); a wide range of approaches used to frame the review, from grouping interventions by common features to using more theoretical approaches; decisions regarding whether and how to quantitatively analyze the interventions, from holistic to individual component analytic approaches; and incomplete and inconsistent reporting of elements critical to understanding the success and impact of multicomponent interventions, such as methods used for implementation the context in which interventions are implemented. We provide a framework for the spectrum of conceptual and analytic approaches to synthesizing studies of multicomponent interventions and an initial list of critical reporting elements for such studies. This information is intended to help systematic reviewers understand the options and tradeoffs available for such reviews. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Comprehensive metabolomic profiling and incident cardiovascular disease: a systematic review

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Background: Metabolomics is a promising tool of cardiovascular biomarker discovery. We systematically reviewed the literature on comprehensive metabolomic profiling in association with incident cardiovascular disease (CVD). Methods and Results: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to Janua...

Effectiveness of workplace weight management interventions: a systematic review

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Background: A systematic review was conducted of randomized trials of workplace weight management interventions, including trials with dietary, physical activity, environmental, behavioral and incentive based components. Main outcomes were defined as change in weight-related measures. Methods: Key w...

[Quality appraisal of systematic reviews or meta-analysis on traditional Chinese medicine published in Chinese journals].

PubMed

Liu, Jian-ping; Xia, Yun

2007-04-01

To critically assess the quality of literature about systematic review or meta-analysis on traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) published in Chinese journals. Electronic searches in CNKI, VIP and Wanfang data-base were conducted to retrieve the systematic reviews or meta-analysis reports on TCM, including herbal medicine, needling, acupuncture and moxibustion, as well as integrative medicine, they were identified and extracted according to the 18 items of QUOROM (quality of reporting of meta-analyses) Statement and relative information. The appraisal was made taking the indexes mainly including objectives, source of data, methods of data extraction, quality assessment of the included studies, measurement data synthesis, etc. Eighty-two systematic reviews were identified, except 6 reviews were excluded for repeatedly published or didn't comply with the enrolled criterion, 76 reviews concerning 51 kinds of diseases were enrolled for appraisal. Among them, 70 reviews evaluated the efficacy of TCM, mainly on Chinese herbs and 9 on acupuncture and moxibustion. In majority of the reviews, randomised controlled trials were included and the data resources were described, but in 26 reviews only the Chinese databases were searched and the description about data extraction and analysis method were too simple; and 70% of reviews assessed the quality of the included studies; none used flow chart to express the process of selection, inclusion and exclusion of studies. Few reviews or Meta-analysis reports reached the international standard and there is insufficient description of methodology for conducting systematic reviews, so it is hardly to be repeated. The authors suggested that advanced methodological training is necessary for reviewers.

Systematic reviews need to consider applicability to disadvantaged populations: inter-rater agreement for a health equity plausibility algorithm

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Background Systematic reviews have been challenged to consider effects on disadvantaged groups. A priori specification of subgroup analyses is recommended to increase the credibility of these analyses. This study aimed to develop and assess inter-rater agreement for an algorithm for systematic review authors to predict whether differences in effect measures are likely for disadvantaged populations relative to advantaged populations (only relative effect measures were addressed). Methods A health equity plausibility algorithm was developed using clinimetric methods with three items based on literature review, key informant interviews and methodology studies. The three items dealt with the plausibility of differences in relative effects across sex or socioeconomic status (SES) due to: 1) patient characteristics; 2) intervention delivery (i.e., implementation); and 3) comparators. Thirty-five respondents (consisting of clinicians, methodologists and research users) assessed the likelihood of differences across sex and SES for ten systematic reviews with these questions. We assessed inter-rater reliability using Fleiss multi-rater kappa. Results The proportion agreement was 66% for patient characteristics (95% confidence interval: 61%-71%), 67% for intervention delivery (95% confidence interval: 62% to 72%) and 55% for the comparator (95% confidence interval: 50% to 60%). Inter-rater kappa, assessed with Fleiss kappa, ranged from 0 to 0.199, representing very low agreement beyond chance. Conclusions Users of systematic reviews rated that important differences in relative effects across sex and socioeconomic status were plausible for a range of individual and population-level interventions. However, there was very low inter-rater agreement for these assessments. There is an unmet need for discussion of plausibility of differential effects in systematic reviews. Increased consideration of external validity and applicability to different populations and settings is warranted in systematic reviews to meet this need. PMID:23253632

Effects of Spaced Retrieval Training on Semantic Memory in Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Oren, Shiri; Willerton, Charlene; Small, Jeff

2014-01-01

Purpose: This article reports on a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of spaced retrieval training (SRT) on semantic memory in people with Alzheimer's disease (AD) or related disorder. Method: An initial systematic database search identified 454 potential studies. After screening and de-duplication, 35 studies that used SRT…

Evidence-Based Systematic Review: Effects of Intensity of Treatment and Constraint-Induced Language Therapy for Individuals with Stroke-Induced Aphasia

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cherney, Leora R.; Patterson, Janet P.; Raymer, Anastasia; Frymark, Tobi; Schooling, Tracy

2008-01-01

Purpose: This systematic review summarizes evidence for intensity of treatment and constraint-induced language therapy (CILT) on measures of language impairment and communication activity/participation in individuals with stroke-induced aphasia. Method: A systematic search of the aphasia literature using 15 electronic databases (e.g., PubMed,…

Voice, Articulation, and Prosody Contribute to Listener Perceptions of Speaker Gender: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Leung, Yeptain; Oates, Jennifer; Chan, Siew Pang

2018-01-01

Purpose: The aim of this study was to provide a systematic review of the aspects of verbal communication contributing to listener perceptions of speaker gender with a view to providing clinicians with guidance for the selection of the training goals when working with transsexual individuals. Method: Preferred reporting items for systematic review…

Factors influencing citations to systematic reviews in skin diseases: a cross-sectional study through Web of Sciences and Scopus*

PubMed Central

Manriquez, Juan; Cataldo, Karina; Harz, Isidora

2015-01-01

BACKGROUND Disseminating information derived from systematic reviews is a fundamental step for translating evidence into practice. OBJECTIVE To determine which features of dermatological SR are associated with systematic review dissemination, using citation rates as an indicator. METHODS Dermatological systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2012 were obtained from Scopus, the ISI Web of Sciences and the Cochrane Skin Group. Bibliometric data of every systematic review were collected and analyzed. RESULTS A total of 320 systematic reviews were analyzed. Univariable analysis showed that the journal impact factor, number of authors, and total references cited were positively associated with the number of citations. There was a significant difference in the median number of citations with regard to the corresponding author's country, type of skin disease, type of funding, and presence of international collaboration. Cochrane reviews were significantly associated with a lower number of citations. Multivariable analysis found that the number of authors, number of references cited and the corresponding author from United Kingdom were independently correlated with many citations. Cochrane systematic reviews tended to be independently associated with a lower number of citations. CONCLUSIONS Citation number to systematic reviews may be improving by increasing the number of authors, especially collaborative authors, and the number of cited references. The reasons for the association of Cochrane SRs with fewer citations should be addressed in future studies. PMID:26560209

A systematic review of pseudophakic monovision for presbyopia correction

PubMed Central

Labiris, Georgios; Toli, Aspa; Perente, Aslin; Ntonti, Panagiota; Kozobolis, Vassilios P.

2017-01-01

A systematic review of the recent literature regarding pseudophakic monovision as a reliable methods for presbyopia correction was performed based on the PubMed, MEDLINE, Nature and the American Academy of Ophthalmology databases in July 2015 and data from 18 descriptive and 12 comparative studies were included in this narrative review. Pseudophakic monosvision seems to be an effective method for presbyopia with high rates of spectacles independence and minimal dysphotopsia side-effects, that should be considered by the modern cataract surgeons. PMID:28730093

A systematic review of teleophthalmological studies in Europe

PubMed Central

Labiris, Georgios; Panagiotopoulou, Eirini-Kanella; Kozobolis, Vassilios P.

2018-01-01

A systematic review of the recent literature regarding a series of ocular diseases involved in European telemedicine projects was performed based on the PubMed, Google Scholar and Springer databases in June 2017. Literature review returned 44 eligible studies; among them, emergency ophthalmology, diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma, age-related macular disease, cataract and retinopathy of prematurity. The majority of studies indicate teleophthalmology as a valid, reliable and cost-efficient method for care-provision in ophthalmology patients which delivers comparable outcomes to the traditional examination methods. PMID:29487825

Summarizing systematic reviews: methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach.

PubMed

Aromataris, Edoardo; Fernandez, Ritin; Godfrey, Christina M; Holly, Cheryl; Khalil, Hanan; Tungpunkom, Patraporn

2015-09-01

With the increase in the number of systematic reviews available, a logical next step to provide decision makers in healthcare with the evidence they require has been the conduct of reviews of existing systematic reviews. Syntheses of existing systematic reviews are referred to by many different names, one of which is an umbrella review. An umbrella review allows the findings of reviews relevant to a review question to be compared and contrasted. An umbrella review's most characteristic feature is that this type of evidence synthesis only considers for inclusion the highest level of evidence, namely other systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A methodology working group was formed by the Joanna Briggs Institute to develop methodological guidance for the conduct of an umbrella review, including diverse types of evidence, both quantitative and qualitative. The aim of this study is to describe the development and guidance for the conduct of an umbrella review. Discussion and testing of the elements of methods for the conduct of an umbrella review were held over a 6-month period by members of a methodology working group. The working group comprised six participants who corresponded via teleconference, e-mail and face-to-face meeting during this development period. In October 2013, the methodology was presented in a workshop at the Joanna Briggs Institute Convention. Workshop participants, review authors and methodologists provided further testing, critique and feedback on the proposed methodology. This study describes the methodology and methods developed for the conduct of an umbrella review that includes published systematic reviews and meta-analyses as the analytical unit of the review. Details are provided regarding the essential elements of an umbrella review, including presentation of the review question in a Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome format, nuances of the inclusion criteria and search strategy. A critical appraisal tool with 10 questions to help assess risk of bias in systematic reviews and meta-analyses was also developed and tested. Relevant details to extract from included reviews and how to best present the findings of both quantitative and qualitative systematic reviews in a reader friendly format are provided. Umbrella reviews provide a ready means for decision makers in healthcare to gain a clear understanding of a broad topic area. The umbrella review methodology described here is the first to consider reviews that report other than quantitative evidence derived from randomized controlled trials. The methodology includes an easy to use and informative summary of evidence table to readily provide decision makers with the available, highest level of evidence relevant to the question posed.

Frequency of data extraction errors and methods to increase data extraction quality: a methodological review.

PubMed

Mathes, Tim; Klaßen, Pauline; Pieper, Dawid

2017-11-28

Our objective was to assess the frequency of data extraction errors and its potential impact on results in systematic reviews. Furthermore, we evaluated the effect of different extraction methods, reviewer characteristics and reviewer training on error rates and results. We performed a systematic review of methodological literature in PubMed, Cochrane methodological registry, and by manual searches (12/2016). Studies were selected by two reviewers independently. Data were extracted in standardized tables by one reviewer and verified by a second. The analysis included six studies; four studies on extraction error frequency, one study comparing different reviewer extraction methods and two studies comparing different reviewer characteristics. We did not find a study on reviewer training. There was a high rate of extraction errors (up to 50%). Errors often had an influence on effect estimates. Different data extraction methods and reviewer characteristics had moderate effect on extraction error rates and effect estimates. The evidence base for established standards of data extraction seems weak despite the high prevalence of extraction errors. More comparative studies are needed to get deeper insights into the influence of different extraction methods.

A systematic review of novel technology for monitoring infant and newborn heart rate.

PubMed

Kevat, Ajay C; Bullen, Denise V R; Davis, Peter G; Kamlin, C Omar F

2017-05-01

Heart rate (HR) is a vital sign for assessing the need for resuscitation. We performed a systematic review of studies assessing novel methods of measuring HR in newborns and infants in the neonatal unit. Two investigators completed independent literature searches. Identified papers were independently evaluated, and relevant data were extracted and analysed. This systematic review identified seven new technologies, including camera-based photoplethysmography, reflectance pulse oximetry, laser Doppler methods, capacitive sensors, piezoelectric sensors, electromyography and a digital stethoscope. Clinicians should be aware of several of these, which may become available for clinical use in the near future. ©2017 Foundation Acta Paediatrica. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: methodological approaches to evaluate the literature and establish best evidence.

PubMed

Skelly, Andrea C; Hashimoto, Robin E; Norvell, Daniel C; Dettori, Joseph R; Fischer, Dena J; Wilson, Jefferson R; Tetreault, Lindsay A; Fehlings, Michael G

2013-10-15

Review of methods. To provide a detailed description of the methods undertaken in the articles in this focus issue pertaining to cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) and ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) and to describe the process used to develop summary statements and clinical recommendations regarding factors associated with the mechanisms, diagnosis, progression, and treatment of CSM and OPLL. We present methods used in conducting the systematic, evidence-based reviews and development of expert panel summary statements and clinical recommendations of the mechanisms, diagnosis, progression, and treatment of CSM and OPLL. Our intent is that clinicians will combine the information from these systematic reviews, narrative reviews, and primary research studies with an understanding of their own capacities and experience to better manage patients with CSM or OPLL and consider future research for the diagnosis and treatment of these diseases. For the systematic reviews, which make up the bulk of the studies in this focus issue, a systematic search and critical review of the English language literature was undertaken for articles published on the mechanisms, diagnosis, progression, and treatment of CSM and OPLL. Articles were screened for relevance using a priori criteria and relevant articles were critically reviewed. Whether an article was included for review depended on whether the study question was descriptive, one of therapy, or one of prognosis. The strength of evidence for the overall body of literature in each topic area was determined by 2 independent reviewers considering risk of bias, consistency, directness, and precision of results using a modification of the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Findings from articles meeting inclusion criteria were summarized. From these summaries, summary statements or clinical recommendations were formulated among subject experts through a modified Delphi process using the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Methods for the 2 primary research studies and the narrative reviews are also reviewed. Because of the nature of questions that needed to be addressed, not all studies in this focus issue were amenable to systematic review. As a result, this focus issue consists of several different article types, including 1 research protocol, 2 primary research studies, 2 narrative literature reviews, 7 systematic reviews, and 3 articles that combine a systematic review component with either a narrative section (n = 2) or a provider survey (n = 1). In general, the strength of evidence ratings ranged from insufficient to moderate. Summary statements or clinical recommendations were made according to available evidence and study type: 16 summary statements were made across 8 articles, and 17 clinical recommendations were made across 9 articles. Three articles had both summary statements and clinical recommendations, 5 had summary statements only, 6 had clinical recommendations only, and 1 (the research protocol) was not amenable to either. Systematic reviews, narrative reviews, and primary research studies were undertaken to understand the mechanisms, diagnosis, progression, and treatment of CSM and OPLL and to provide summary statements and clinical recommendations. This article reports the methods used in the studies in this focus issue. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: The objectives of this focus issue were met using a variety of article and study designs, each of which has some unique methodological aspects associated with it. The reader should refer to the full article in this issue for additional details specific to that topic. The methods for systematic review follow accepted standards for rigor and, together with the application of Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation, are intended to allow for transparency in the process for creating the clinical recommendation.

Methods for systematic reviews of health economic evaluations: a systematic review, comparison, and synthesis of method literature.

PubMed

Mathes, Tim; Walgenbach, Maren; Antoine, Sunya-Lee; Pieper, Dawid; Eikermann, Michaela

2014-10-01

The quality of systematic reviews of health economic evaluations (SR-HE) is often limited because of methodological shortcomings. One reason for this poor quality is that there are no established standards for the preparation of SR-HE. The objective of this study is to compare existing methods and suggest best practices for the preparation of SR-HE. To identify the relevant methodological literature on SR-HE, a systematic literature search was performed in Embase, Medline, the National Health System Economic Evaluation Database, the Health Technology Assessment Database, and the Cochrane methodology register, and webpages of international health technology assessment agencies were searched. The study selection was performed independently by 2 reviewers. Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. On the basis of the overlaps in the recommendations for the methods of SR-HE in the included papers, suggestions for best practices for the preparation of SR-HE were developed. Nineteen relevant publications were identified. The recommendations within them often differed. However, for most process steps there was some overlap between recommendations for the methods of preparation. The overlaps were taken as basis on which to develop suggestions for the following process steps of preparation: defining the research question, developing eligibility criteria, conducting a literature search, selecting studies, assessing the methodological study quality, assessing transferability, and synthesizing data. The differences in the proposed recommendations are not always explainable by the focus on certain evaluation types, target audiences, or integration in the decision process. Currently, there seem to be no standard methods for the preparation of SR-HE. The suggestions presented here can contribute to the harmonization of methods for the preparation of SR-HE. © The Author(s) 2014.

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 additional search methods, including cited reference searching and consulting with experts, this approach could help maintain broad retrieval of relevant studies while improving search efficiency. Findings also have implications for designing specialized databases for public health research.

Challenges in systematic reviews: synthesis of topics related to the delivery, organization, and financing of health care.

PubMed

Bravata, Dena M; McDonald, Kathryn M; Shojania, Kaveh G; Sundaram, Vandana; Owens, Douglas K

2005-06-21

Some important health policy topics, such as those related to the delivery, organization, and financing of health care, present substantial challenges to established methods for evidence synthesis. For example, such reviews may ask: What is the effect of for-profit versus not-for-profit delivery of care on patient outcomes? Or, which strategies are the most effective for promoting preventive care? This paper describes innovative methods for synthesizing evidence related to the delivery, organization, and financing of health care. We found 13 systematic reviews on these topics that described novel methodologic approaches. Several of these syntheses used 3 approaches: conceptual frameworks to inform problem formulation, systematic searches that included nontraditional literature sources, and hybrid synthesis methods that included simulations to address key gaps in the literature. As the primary literature on these topics expands, so will opportunities to develop additional novel methods for performing high-quality comprehensive syntheses.

Research Review: Psychosocial Adjustment and Mental Health in Former Child Soldiers--A Systematic Review of the Literature and Recommendations for Future Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Betancourt, Theresa S.; Borisova, Ivelina; Williams, Timothy P.; Meyers-Ohki, Sarah E.; Rubin-Smith, Julia E.; Annan, Jeannie; Kohrt, Brandon A.

2013-01-01

Aims and scope: This article reviews the available quantitative research on psychosocial adjustment and mental health among children (age less than 18 years) associated with armed forces and armed groups (CAAFAG)--commonly referred to as child soldiers. Methods: PRISMA standards for systematic reviews were used to search PubMed, PsycInfo, JSTOR,…

Development and Evaluation of ‘Briefing Notes’ as a Novel Knowledge Translation Tool to Aid the Implementation of Sex/Gender Analysis in Systematic Reviews: A Pilot Study

PubMed Central

Doull, Marion; Welch, Vivian; Puil, Lorri; Runnels, Vivien; Coen, Stephanie E.; Shea, Beverley; O’Neill, Jennifer; Borkhoff, Cornelia; Tudiver, Sari; Boscoe, Madeline

2014-01-01

Background There is increasing recognition of sex/gender differences in health and the importance of identifying differential effects of interventions for men and women. Yet, to whom the research evidence does or does not apply, with regard to sex/gender, is often insufficiently answered. This is also true for systematic reviews which synthesize results of primary studies. A lack of analysis and reporting of evidence on sex/gender raises concerns about the applicability of systematic reviews. To bridge this gap, this pilot study aimed to translate knowledge about sex/gender analysis (SGA) into a user-friendly ‘briefing note’ format and evaluate its potential in aiding the implementation of SGA in systematic reviews. Methods Our Sex/Gender Methods Group used an interactive process to translate knowledge about sex/gender into briefing notes, a concise communication tool used by policy and decision makers. The briefing notes were developed in collaboration with three Cochrane Collaboration review groups (HIV/AIDS, Hypertension, and Musculoskeletal) who were also the target knowledge users of the briefing notes. Briefing note development was informed by existing systematic review checklists, literature on sex/gender, in-person and virtual meetings, and consultation with topic experts. Finally, we held a workshop for potential users to evaluate the notes. Results Each briefing note provides tailored guidance on considering sex/gender to reviewers who are planning or conducting systematic reviews and includes the rationale for considering sex/gender, with examples specific to each review group’s focus. Review authors found that the briefing notes provided welcome guidance on implementing SGA that was clear and concise, but also identified conceptual and implementation challenges. Conclusions Sex/gender briefing notes are a promising knowledge translation tool. By encouraging sex/gender analysis and equity considerations in systematic reviews, the briefing notes can assist systematic reviewers in ensuring the applicability of research evidence, with the goal of improved health outcomes for diverse populations. PMID:25372876

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 work for the reviewers. It requires a deeper understanding of how reviewers can operationalise the guidance taking into consideration the barriers and facilitators involved. This has implications not only for understanding the usefulness and burden of the guidance but also for the uptake of guidance and its ultimate goal of improving health inequalities considerations in systematic reviews.

Are we talking the same paradigm? Considering methodological choices in health education systematic review.

PubMed

Gordon, Morris

2016-07-01

For the past two decades, there have been calls for medical education to become more evidence-based. Whilst previous works have described how to use such methods, there are no works discussing when or why to select different methods from either a conceptual or pragmatic perspective. This question is not to suggest the superiority of such methods, but that having a clear rationale to underpin such choices is key and should be communicated to the reader of such works. Our goal within this manuscript is to consider the philosophical alignment of these different review and synthesis modalities and how this impacts on their suitability to answer different systematic review questions within health education. The key characteristic of a systematic review that should impact the synthesis choice is discussed in detail. By clearly defining this and the related outcome expected from the review and for educators who will receive this outcome, the alignment will become apparent. This will then allow deployment of an appropriate methodology that is fit for purpose and will indeed justify the significant work needed to complete a systematic. Key items discussed are the positivist synthesis methods meta-analysis and content analysis to address questions in the form of 'whether and what' education is effective. These can be juxtaposed with the constructivist aligned thematic analysis and meta-ethnography to address questions in the form of 'why'. The concept of the realist review is also considered. It is proposed that authors of such work should describe their research alignment and the link between question, alignment and evidence synthesis method selected. The process of exploring the range of modalities and their alignment highlights gaps in the researcher's arsenal. Future works are needed to explore the impact of such changes in writing from authors of medical education systematic review.

Are we talking the same paradigm? Considering methodological choices in health education systematic review

PubMed Central

Gordon, Morris

2016-01-01

Abstract For the past two decades, there have been calls for medical education to become more evidence-based. Whilst previous works have described how to use such methods, there are no works discussing when or why to select different methods from either a conceptual or pragmatic perspective. This question is not to suggest the superiority of such methods, but that having a clear rationale to underpin such choices is key and should be communicated to the reader of such works. Our goal within this manuscript is to consider the philosophical alignment of these different review and synthesis modalities and how this impacts on their suitability to answer different systematic review questions within health education. The key characteristic of a systematic review that should impact the synthesis choice is discussed in detail. By clearly defining this and the related outcome expected from the review and for educators who will receive this outcome, the alignment will become apparent. This will then allow deployment of an appropriate methodology that is fit for purpose and will indeed justify the significant work needed to complete a systematic. Key items discussed are the positivist synthesis methods meta-analysis and content analysis to address questions in the form of ‘whether and what’ education is effective. These can be juxtaposed with the constructivist aligned thematic analysis and meta-ethnography to address questions in the form of ‘why’. The concept of the realist review is also considered. It is proposed that authors of such work should describe their research alignment and the link between question, alignment and evidence synthesis method selected. The process of exploring the range of modalities and their alignment highlights gaps in the researcher’s arsenal. Future works are needed to explore the impact of such changes in writing from authors of medical education systematic review. PMID:27007488

The Assessment of Metacognition in Children Aged 4-16 Years: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gascoine, Louise; Higgins, Steve; Wall, Kate

2017-01-01

This article presents the results of a systematic review of methods that have been used to measure or assess metacognition in children aged 4-16 years over a 20-year period (1992-2012). It includes an overview of the types of tool and methods used linked with the ages of the participants targeted and how metacognition and associated concepts are…

Evaluation of background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI: a systematic review

PubMed Central

Signori, Alessio; Valdora, Francesca; Rossi, Federica; Calabrese, Massimo; Durando, Manuela; Mariscotto, Giovanna; Tagliafico, Alberto

2017-01-01

Objective: To perform a systematic review of the methods used for background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) evaluation on breast MRI. Methods: Studies dealing with BPE assessment on breast MRI were retrieved from major medical libraries independently by four reviewers up to 6 October 2015. The keywords used for database searching are “background parenchymal enhancement”, “parenchymal enhancement”, “MRI” and “breast”. The studies were included if qualitative and/or quantitative methods for BPE assessment were described. Results: Of the 420 studies identified, a total of 52 articles were included in the systematic review. 28 studies performed only a qualitative assessment of BPE, 13 studies performed only a quantitative assessment and 11 studies performed both qualitative and quantitative assessments. A wide heterogeneity was found in the MRI sequences and in the quantitative methods used for BPE assessment. Conclusion: A wide variability exists in the quantitative evaluation of BPE on breast MRI. More studies focused on a reliable and comparable method for quantitative BPE assessment are needed. Advances in knowledge: More studies focused on a quantitative BPE assessment are needed. PMID:27925480

Peer review of health research funding proposals: A systematic map and systematic review of innovations for effectiveness and efficiency

PubMed Central

Frampton, Geoff K.; Pickett, Karen; Wyatt, Jeremy C.

2018-01-01

Objective To investigate methods and processes for timely, efficient and good quality peer review of research funding proposals in health. Methods A two-stage evidence synthesis: (1) a systematic map to describe the key characteristics of the evidence base, followed by (2) a systematic review of the studies stakeholders prioritised as relevant from the map on the effectiveness and efficiency of peer review ‘innovations’. Standard processes included literature searching, duplicate inclusion criteria screening, study keyword coding, data extraction, critical appraisal and study synthesis. Results A total of 83 studies from 15 countries were included in the systematic map. The evidence base is diverse, investigating many aspects of the systems for, and processes of, peer review. The systematic review included eight studies from Australia, Canada, and the USA, evaluating a broad range of peer review innovations. These studies showed that simplifying the process by shortening proposal forms, using smaller reviewer panels, or expediting processes can speed up the review process and reduce costs, but this might come at the expense of peer review quality, a key aspect that has not been assessed. Virtual peer review using videoconferencing or teleconferencing appears promising for reducing costs by avoiding the need for reviewers to travel, but again any consequences for quality have not been adequately assessed. Conclusions There is increasing international research activity into the peer review of health research funding. The studies reviewed had methodological limitations and variable generalisability to research funders. Given these limitations it is not currently possible to recommend immediate implementation of these innovations. However, many appear promising based on existing evidence, and could be adapted as necessary by funders and evaluated. Where feasible, experimental evaluation, including randomised controlled trials, should be conducted, evaluating impact on effectiveness, efficiency and quality. PMID:29750807

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

PubMed Central

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

2015-01-01

Objective 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. Methods 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. Results 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. Conclusions 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. PMID:25914722

Evidence-Based Systematic Review: Effects of Nonspeech Oral Motor Exercises on Speech

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

McCauley, Rebecca J.; Strand, Edythe; Lof, Gregory L.; Schooling, Tracy; Frymark, Tobi

2009-01-01

Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the current evidence for the use of oral motor exercises (OMEs) on speech (i.e., speech physiology, speech production, and functional speech outcomes) as a means of supporting further research and clinicians' use of evidence-based practice. Method: The peer-reviewed literature from 1960…

A Systematic Review of Parent and Family-Based Intervention Effectiveness on Sexual Outcomes in Young People

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Downing, Jennifer; Jones, Lisa; Bates, Geoff; Sumnall, Harry; Bellis, Mark A.

2011-01-01

Limited evidence exists about the effectiveness of parent/family-based interventions for preventing poor sexual health outcomes, thus a systematic review was conducted as part of a wider review of community-based sex and relationships and alcohol education. Method guidance from the UK's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence was…

College Students, Shared Decision Making, and the Appropriate Use of Antibiotics for Respiratory Tract Infections: A Systematic Literature Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Blyer, Kristina; Hulton, Linda

2016-01-01

Objective: This systematic review examines shared decision making to promote the appropriate use of antibiotics for college students with respiratory tract infections. Participants/Methods: CINAL, Cochrane, PubMed, EBSCO, and PsycNET were searched in October 2014 using the following criteria: English language, human subjects, peer-reviewed, shared…

A Systematic Literature Review of Funding for Higher Education Institutions in Developed Countries

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Zhang, Qilong; Ning, Kang; Barnes, Ruth

2016-01-01

Resource allocation and funding in higher education is crucial to the success of reform and transformation of our higher education system. With a view to identifying trends and best practices in the area, utilizing a method of systematic literature review, we have critically reviewed relevant theories and practices from developed counties that are…

Testing the reliability and efficiency of the pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed studies review.

PubMed

Pace, Romina; Pluye, Pierre; Bartlett, Gillian; Macaulay, Ann C; Salsberg, Jon; Jagosh, Justin; Seller, Robbyn

2012-01-01

Systematic literature reviews identify, select, appraise, and synthesize relevant literature on a particular topic. Typically, these reviews examine primary studies based on similar methods, e.g., experimental trials. In contrast, interest in a new form of review, known as mixed studies review (MSR), which includes qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies, is growing. In MSRs, reviewers appraise studies that use different methods allowing them to obtain in-depth answers to complex research questions. However, appraising the quality of studies with different methods remains challenging. To facilitate systematic MSRs, a pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) has been developed at McGill University (a checklist and a tutorial), which can be used to concurrently appraise the methodological quality of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies. The purpose of the present study is to test the reliability and efficiency of a pilot version of the MMAT. The Center for Participatory Research at McGill conducted a systematic MSR on the benefits of Participatory Research (PR). Thirty-two PR evaluation studies were appraised by two independent reviewers using the pilot MMAT. Among these, 11 (34%) involved nurses as researchers or research partners. Appraisal time was measured to assess efficiency. Inter-rater reliability was assessed by calculating a kappa statistic based on dichotomized responses for each criterion. An appraisal score was determined for each study, which allowed the calculation of an overall intra-class correlation. On average, it took 14 min to appraise a study (excluding the initial reading of articles). Agreement between reviewers was moderate to perfect with regards to MMAT criteria, and substantial with respect to the overall quality score of appraised studies. The MMAT is unique, thus the reliability of the pilot MMAT is promising, and encourages further development. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. 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.

Hard-to-reach populations of men who have sex with men and sex workers: a systematic review on sampling methods.

PubMed

Barros, Ana B; Dias, Sonia F; Martins, Maria Rosario O

2015-10-30

In public health, hard-to-reach populations are often recruited by non-probabilistic sampling methods that produce biased results. In order to overcome this, several sampling methods have been improved and developed in the last years. The aim of this systematic review was to identify all current methods used to survey most-at-risk populations of men who have sex with men and sex workers. The review also aimed to assess if there were any relations between the study populations and the sampling methods used to recruit them. Lastly, we wanted to assess if the number of publications originated in middle and low human development (MLHD) countries had been increasing in the last years. A systematic review was conducted using electronic databases and a total of 268 published studies were included in the analysis. In this review, 11 recruitment methods were identified. Semi-probabilistic methods were used most commonly to survey men who have sex with men, and the use of the Internet was the method that gathered more respondents. We found that female sex workers were more frequently recruited through non-probabilistic methods than men who have sex with men (odds = 2.2; p < 0.05; confidence interval (CI) [1.1-4.2]). In the last 6 years, the number of studies based in middle and low human development countries increased more than the number of studies based in very high and high human development countries (odds = 2.5; p < 0.05; CI [1.3-4.9]). This systematic literature review identified 11 methods used to sample men who have sex with men and female sex workers. There is an association between the type of sampling method and the population being studied. The number of studies based in middle and low human development countries has increased in the last 6 years of this study.

Cost-effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening and Treatment Methods: Mapping of Systematic Reviews

PubMed Central

Abdolahi, Hossein Mashhadi; Asiabar, Ali Sarabi; Azami-Aghdash, Saber; Pournaghi-Azar, Fatemeh; Rezapour, Aziz

2018-01-01

Objective: Due to extensive literature on colorectal cancer and their heterogeneous results, this study aimed to summarize the systematic reviews which review the cost-effectiveness studies on different aspects of colorectal cancer. Methods: The required data were collected by searching the following key words according to MeSH: “colorectal cancer,” “colorectal oncology,” “colorectal carcinoma,” “colorectal neoplasm,” “colorectal tumors,” “cost-effectiveness,” “systematic review,” and “meta-analysis.” The following databases were searched: PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Two reviewers evaluated the articles according to the checklist of “assessment of multiple systematic reviews” (AMSTAR) tool. Results: Finally, eight systematic reviews were included in the study. The Drummond checklist was mostly used for assessing the quality of the articles. The main perspective was related to the payer and the least was relevant to the social. The majority of the cases referred to sensitivity analysis (in 76% of the cases) and the lowest point also was allocated to discounting (in 37% of cases). The Markov model was used most widely in the studies. Treatment methods examined in the studies were not cost-effective in comparison with the studied units. Among the screening methods, computerized tomographic colonography and fecal DNA were cost-effective. The average score of the articles’ qualities was high (9.8 out of 11). Conclusions: The community perspective should be taken into consideration at large in the studies. It is necessary to pay more attention to discounting subject in studies. More frequent application of the Markov model is recommended. PMID:29379836

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

What are the best methodologies for rapid reviews of the research evidence for evidence-informed decision making in health policy and practice: a rapid review.

PubMed

Haby, Michelle M; Chapman, Evelina; Clark, Rachel; Barreto, Jorge; Reveiz, Ludovic; Lavis, John N

2016-11-25

Rapid reviews have the potential to overcome a key barrier to the use of research evidence in decision making, namely that of the lack of timely and relevant research. This rapid review of systematic reviews and primary studies sought to answer the question: What are the best methodologies to enable a rapid review of research evidence for evidence-informed decision making in health policy and practice? This rapid review utilised systematic review methods and was conducted according to a pre-defined protocol including clear inclusion criteria (PROSPERO registration: CRD42015015998). A comprehensive search strategy was used, including published and grey literature, written in English, French, Portuguese or Spanish, from 2004 onwards. Eleven databases and two websites were searched. Two review authors independently applied the eligibility criteria. Data extraction was done by one reviewer and checked by a second. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed independently by two reviewers. A narrative summary of the results is presented. Five systematic reviews and one randomised controlled trial (RCT) that investigated methodologies for rapid reviews met the inclusion criteria. None of the systematic reviews were of sufficient quality to allow firm conclusions to be made. Thus, the findings need to be treated with caution. There is no agreed definition of rapid reviews in the literature and no agreed methodology for conducting rapid reviews. While a wide range of 'shortcuts' are used to make rapid reviews faster than a full systematic review, the included studies found little empirical evidence of their impact on the conclusions of either rapid or systematic reviews. There is some evidence from the included RCT (that had a low risk of bias) that rapid reviews may improve clarity and accessibility of research evidence for decision makers. Greater care needs to be taken in improving the transparency of the methods used in rapid review products. There is no evidence available to suggest that rapid reviews should not be done or that they are misleading in any way. We offer an improved definition of rapid reviews to guide future research as well as clearer guidance for policy and practice.

The relationship between organizational culture and the health and wellbeing of hospital nurses worldwide: a mixed methods systematic review protocol.

PubMed

Whitcombe, Anne; Cooper, Kay; Palmer, Emma

2016-06-01

The objective of this mixed methods systematic review is to examine the relationship between organizational culture and the health and wellbeing of hospital nurses, and to develop an aggregated synthesis of quantitative and qualitative systematic reviews to derive recommendations for policy and practice.Organizational culture comprises factors such as leadership, management and support, a health and safety oriented workplace climate and job characteristics.The quantitative component of this review will explore the relationship between organizational culture and the following outcomes in hospital nurses which may be indicators of health and wellbeing: work-related injury such as needlestick or sharp injuries, musculoskeletal injuries and conditions such as low back pain, burnout and general wellbeing.The qualitative component of this review will explore the perceptions of hospital nurses in relation to the impact of organizational culture on their own health and wellbeing and those of their nursing colleagues.

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.

Dietary Change Interventions for Undergraduate Populations: Systematic Review and Recommendations

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Pember, Sarah E.; Knowlden, Adam P.

2017-01-01

Background: Research demonstrates a decline in healthy eating behaviors during transitional years at university, potentially leading to weight gain and establishing maladaptive dietary habits. Purpose: This systematic review assessed the efficacy of previous nutrition interventions for undergraduates, evaluating design and implementation. Methods:…

Measurement of patient safety: a systematic review of the reliability and validity of adverse event detection with record review

PubMed Central

Hanskamp-Sebregts, Mirelle; Zegers, Marieke; Vincent, Charles; van Gurp, Petra J; de Vet, Henrica C W; Wollersheim, Hub

2016-01-01

Objectives Record review is the most used method to quantify patient safety. We systematically reviewed the reliability and validity of adverse event detection with record review. Design A systematic review of the literature. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library and from their inception through February 2015. We included all studies that aimed to describe the reliability and/or validity of record review. Two reviewers conducted data extraction. We pooled κ values (κ) and analysed the differences in subgroups according to number of reviewers, reviewer experience and training level, adjusted for the prevalence of adverse events. Results In 25 studies, the psychometric data of the Global Trigger Tool (GTT) and the Harvard Medical Practice Study (HMPS) were reported and 24 studies were included for statistical pooling. The inter-rater reliability of the GTT and HMPS showed a pooled κ of 0.65 and 0.55, respectively. The inter-rater agreement was statistically significantly higher when the group of reviewers within a study consisted of a maximum five reviewers. We found no studies reporting on the validity of the GTT and HMPS. Conclusions The reliability of record review is moderate to substantial and improved when a small group of reviewers carried out record review. The validity of the record review method has never been evaluated, while clinical data registries, autopsy or direct observations of patient care are potential reference methods that can be used to test concurrent validity. PMID:27550650

Using rapid reviews: an example from a study conducted to inform policy-making.

PubMed

O'Leary, Denise F; Casey, Mary; O'Connor, Laserina; Stokes, Diarmuid; Fealy, Gerard M; O'Brien, Denise; Smith, Rita; McNamara, Martin S; Egan, Claire

2017-03-01

A discussion of the potential use of rapid review approaches in nursing and midwifery research which presents a worked example from a study conducted to inform policy decision-making. Rapid reviews, which can be defined as outputs of a knowledge synthesis approach that involves modifying or omitting elements of a systematic review process due to limited time or resources, are becoming increasingly popular in health research. This paper provides guidance on how a rapid review can be undertaken and discusses the strengths and challenges of the approach. Data from a rapid review of the literature undertaken in 2015 is used as a worked example to highlight one method of undertaking a rapid review. Seeking evidence to inform health policy-making or evidence based practice is a process that can be limited by time constraints, making it difficult to conduct comprehensive systematic reviews. Rapid reviews provide a solution as they are a systematic method of synthesizing evidence quickly. There is no single best way to conduct a rapid review but researchers can ensure they are adhering to best practice by being systematic, having subject and methodological expertise on the review team, reporting the details of the approach they took, highlighting the limitations of the approach, engaging in good evidence synthesis and communicating regularly with end users, other team members and experts. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

How to Perform a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Imaging Studies.

PubMed

Cronin, Paul; Kelly, Aine Marie; Altaee, Duaa; Foerster, Bradley; Petrou, Myria; Dwamena, Ben A

2018-05-01

A systematic review is a comprehensive search, critical evaluation, and synthesis of all the relevant studies on a specific (clinical) topic that can be applied to the evaluation of diagnostic and screening imaging studies. It can be a qualitative or a quantitative (meta-analysis) review of available literature. A meta-analysis uses statistical methods to combine and summarize the results of several studies. In this review, a 12-step approach to performing a systematic review (and meta-analysis) is outlined under the four domains: (1) Problem Formulation and Data Acquisition, (2) Quality Appraisal of Eligible Studies, (3) Statistical Analysis of Quantitative Data, and (4) Clinical Interpretation of the Evidence. This review is specifically geared toward the performance of a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (imaging) studies. Copyright © 2018 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Methodological issues and recommendations for systematic reviews of prognostic studies: an example from cardiovascular disease.

PubMed

Dretzke, Janine; Ensor, Joie; Bayliss, Sue; Hodgkinson, James; Lordkipanidzé, Marie; Riley, Richard D; Fitzmaurice, David; Moore, David

2014-12-03

Prognostic factors are associated with the risk of future health outcomes in individuals with a particular health condition. The prognostic ability of such factors is increasingly being assessed in both primary research and systematic reviews. Systematic review methodology in this area is continuing to evolve, reflected in variable approaches to key methodological aspects. The aim of this article was to (i) explore and compare the methodology of systematic reviews of prognostic factors undertaken for the same clinical question, (ii) to discuss implications for review findings, and (iii) to present recommendations on what might be considered to be 'good practice' approaches. The sample was comprised of eight systematic reviews addressing the same clinical question, namely whether 'aspirin resistance' (a potential prognostic factor) has prognostic utility relative to future vascular events in patients on aspirin therapy for secondary prevention. A detailed comparison of methods around study identification, study selection, quality assessment, approaches to analysis, and reporting of findings was undertaken and the implications discussed. These were summarised into key considerations that may be transferable to future systematic reviews of prognostic factors. Across systematic reviews addressing the same clinical question, there were considerable differences in the numbers of studies identified and overlap between included studies, which could only partially be explained by different study eligibility criteria. Incomplete reporting and differences in terminology within primary studies hampered study identification and selection process across reviews. Quality assessment was highly variable and only one systematic review considered a checklist for studies of prognostic questions. There was inconsistency between reviews in approaches towards analysis, synthesis, addressing heterogeneity and reporting of results. Different methodological approaches may ultimately affect the findings and interpretation of systematic reviews of prognostic research, with implications for clinical decision-making.

Collaboration challenges in systematic reviews: a survey of health sciences librarians

PubMed Central

Nicholson, Joey; McCrillis, Aileen; Williams, Jeff D.

2017-01-01

Objective: While many librarians have been asked to participate in systematic reviews with researchers, often these researchers are not familiar with the systematic review process or the appropriate role for librarians. The purpose of this study was to identify the challenges and barriers that librarians face when collaborating on systematic reviews. To take a wider view of the whole process of collaborating on systematic reviews, the authors deliberately focused on interpersonal and methodological issues other than searching itself. Methods: To characterize the biggest challenges that librarians face while collaborating on systematic review projects, we used a web-based survey. The thirteen-item survey included seventeen challenges grouped into two categories: methodological and interpersonal. Participants were required to indicate the frequency and difficulty of the challenges listed. Open-ended questions allowed survey participants to describe challenges not listed in the survey and to describe strategies used to overcome challenges. Results: Of the 17 challenges listed in the survey, 8 were reported as common by over 40% of respondents. These included methodological issues around having too broad or narrow research questions, lacking eligibility criteria, having unclear research questions, and not following established methods. The remaining challenges were interpersonal, including issues around student-led projects and the size of the research team. Of the top 8 most frequent challenges, 5 were also ranked as most difficult to handle. Open-ended responses underscored many of the challenges included in the survey and revealed several additional challenges. Conclusions: These results suggest that the most frequent and challenging issues relate to development of the research question and general communication with team members. Clear protocols for collaboration on systematic reviews, as well as a culture of mentorship, can help librarians prevent and address these challenges. PMID:28983202

Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation.

PubMed

Shamseer, Larissa; Moher, David; Clarke, Mike; Ghersi, Davina; Liberati, Alessandro; Petticrew, Mark; Shekelle, Paul; Stewart, Lesley A

2015-01-02

Protocols of systematic reviews and meta-analyses allow for planning and documentation of review methods, act as a guard against arbitrary decision making during review conduct, enable readers to assess for the presence of selective reporting against completed reviews, and, when made publicly available, reduce duplication of efforts and potentially prompt collaboration. Evidence documenting the existence of selective reporting and excessive duplication of reviews on the same or similar topics is accumulating and many calls have been made in support of the documentation and public availability of review protocols. Several efforts have emerged in recent years to rectify these problems, including development of an international register for prospective reviews (PROSPERO) and launch of the first open access journal dedicated to the exclusive publication of systematic review products, including protocols (BioMed Central's Systematic Reviews). Furthering these efforts and building on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, an international group of experts has created a guideline to improve the transparency, accuracy, completeness, and frequency of documented systematic review and meta-analysis protocols--PRISMA-P (for protocols) 2015. The PRISMA-P checklist contains 17 items considered to be essential and minimum components of a systematic review or meta-analysis protocol.This PRISMA-P 2015 Explanation and Elaboration paper provides readers with a full understanding of and evidence about the necessity of each item as well as a model example from an existing published protocol. This paper should be read together with the PRISMA-P 2015 statement. Systematic review authors and assessors are strongly encouraged to make use of PRISMA-P when drafting and appraising review protocols. © BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2014.

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 the prospect of rapid development of search methods.

An overview and methodological assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of enhanced recovery programmes in colorectal surgery

PubMed Central

Chambers, Duncan; Paton, Fiona; Wilson, Paul; Eastwood, Alison; Craig, Dawn; Fox, Dave; Jayne, David; McGinnes, Erika

2014-01-01

Objectives To identify and critically assess the extent to which systematic reviews of enhanced recovery programmes for patients undergoing colorectal surgery differ in their methodology and reported estimates of effect. Design Review of published systematic reviews. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database from 1990 to March 2013. Systematic reviews of enhanced recovery programmes for patients undergoing colorectal surgery were eligible for inclusion. Primary and secondary outcome measures The primary outcome was length of hospital stay. We assessed changes in pooled estimates of treatment effect over time and how these might have been influenced by decisions taken by researchers as well as by the availability of new trials. The quality of systematic reviews was assessed using the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) DARE critical appraisal process. Results 10 systematic reviews were included. Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials have consistently shown a reduction in length of hospital stay with enhanced recovery compared with traditional care. The estimated effect tended to increase from 2006 to 2010 as more trials were published but has not altered significantly in the most recent review, despite the inclusion of several unique trials. The best estimate appears to be an average reduction of around 2.5 days in primary postoperative length of stay. Differences between reviews reflected differences in interpretation of inclusion criteria, searching and analytical methods or software. Conclusions Systematic reviews of enhanced recovery programmes show a high level of research waste, with multiple reviews covering identical or very similar groups of trials. Where multiple reviews exist on a topic, interpretation may require careful attention to apparently minor differences between reviews. Researchers can help readers by acknowledging existing reviews and through clear reporting of key decisions, especially on inclusion/exclusion and on statistical pooling. PMID:24879828

Impact of librarians on reporting of the literature searching component of pediatric systematic reviews*

PubMed Central

Meert, Deborah; Torabi, Nazi; Costella, John

2016-01-01

Objective A critical element in conducting a systematic review is the identification of studies. To date, very little empirical evidence has been reported on whether the presence of a librarian or information professional can contribute to the quality of the final product. The goal of this study was to compare the reporting rigor of the literature searching component of systematic reviews with and without the help of a librarian. Method Systematic reviews published from 2002 to 2011 in the twenty highest impact factor pediatrics journals were collected from MEDLINE. Corresponding authors were contacted via an email survey to determine if a librarian was involved, the role that the librarian played, and functions that the librarian performed. The reviews were scored independently by two reviewers using a fifteen-item checklist. Results There were 186 reviews that met the inclusion criteria, and 44% of the authors indicated the involvement of a librarian in conducting the systematic review. With the presence of a librarian as coauthor or team member, the mean checklist score was 8.40, compared to 6.61 (p<0.001) for reviews without a librarian. Conclusions Findings indicate that having a librarian as a coauthor or team member correlates with a higher score in the literature searching component of systematic reviews. PMID:27822147

A Youth Suicide Prevention Plan for Canada: A Systematic Review of Reviews

PubMed Central

Bennett, Kathryn; Rhodes, Anne E; Duda, Stephanie; Cheung, Amy H; Manassis, Katharina; Links, Paul; Mushquash, Christopher; Braunberger, Peter; Newton, Amanda S; Kutcher, Stanley; Bridge, Jeffrey A; Santos, Robert G; Manion, Ian G; McLennan, John D; Bagnell, Alexa; Lipman, Ellen; Rice, Maureen; Szatmari, Peter

2015-01-01

Objective: We conducted an expedited knowledge synthesis (EKS) to facilitate evidence-informed decision making concerning youth suicide prevention, specifically school-based strategies and nonschool-based interventions designed to prevent repeat attempts. Methods: Systematic review of review methods were applied. Inclusion criteria were as follows: systematic review or meta-analysis; prevention in youth 0 to 24 years; peer-reviewed English literature. Review quality was determined with AMSTAR (a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews). Nominal group methods quantified consensus on recommendations derived from the findings. Results: No included review addressing school-based prevention (n = 7) reported decreased suicide death rates based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled cohort studies (CCSs), but reduced suicide attempts, suicidal ideation, and proxy measures of suicide risk were reported (based on RCTs and CCSs). Included reviews addressing prevention of repeat suicide attempts (n = 14) found the following: emergency department transition programs may reduce suicide deaths, hospitalizations, and treatment nonadherence (based on RCTs and CCSs); training primary care providers in depression treatment may reduce repeated attempts (based on one RCT); antidepressants may increase short-term suicide risk in some patients (based on RCTs and meta-analyses); this increase is offset by overall population-based reductions in suicide associated with antidepressant treatment of youth depression (based on observational studies); and prevention with psychosocial interventions requires further evaluation. No review addressed sex or gender differences systematically, Aboriginal youth as a special population, harm, or cost-effectiveness. Consensus on 6 recommendations ranged from 73% to 100%. Conclusions: Our EKS facilitates decision maker access to what is known about effective youth suicide prevention interventions. A national research-to-practice network that links researchers and decision makers is recommended to implement and evaluate promising interventions; to eliminate the use of ineffective or harmful interventions; and to clarify prevention intervention effects on death by suicide, suicide attempts, and suicidal ideation. Such a network could position Canada as a leader in youth suicide prevention. PMID:26175322

A Guide to Writing a Qualitative Systematic Review Protocol to Enhance Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Health Care.

PubMed

Butler, Ashleigh; Hall, Helen; Copnell, Beverley

2016-06-01

The qualitative systematic review is a rapidly developing area of nursing research. In order to present trustworthy, high-quality recommendations, such reviews should be based on a review protocol to minimize bias and enhance transparency and reproducibility. Although there are a number of resources available to guide researchers in developing a quantitative review protocol, very few resources exist for qualitative reviews. To guide researchers through the process of developing a qualitative systematic review protocol, using an example review question. The key elements required in a systematic review protocol are discussed, with a focus on application to qualitative reviews: Development of a research question; formulation of key search terms and strategies; designing a multistage review process; critical appraisal of qualitative literature; development of data extraction techniques; and data synthesis. The paper highlights important considerations during the protocol development process, and uses a previously developed review question as a working example. This paper will assist novice researchers in developing a qualitative systematic review protocol. By providing a worked example of a protocol, the paper encourages the development of review protocols, enhancing the trustworthiness and value of the completed qualitative systematic review findings. Qualitative systematic reviews should be based on well planned, peer reviewed protocols to enhance the trustworthiness of results and thus their usefulness in clinical practice. Protocols should outline, in detail, the processes which will be used to undertake the review, including key search terms, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the methods used for critical appraisal, data extraction and data analysis to facilitate transparency of the review process. Additionally, journals should encourage and support the publication of review protocols, and should require reference to a protocol prior to publication of the review results. © 2016 Sigma Theta Tau International.

The characteristics of national health initiatives promoting earlier cancer diagnosis among adult populations: a systematic review protocol

PubMed Central

Calanzani, Natalia; Weller, David; Campbell, Christine

2017-01-01

Introduction The increasing burden of cancer morbidity and mortality has led to the development of national health initiatives to promote earlier cancer diagnosis and improve cancer survival. This protocol describes a systematic review aiming to identify the evidence about such initiatives among the adult population. We will describe their components, stakeholders and target populations, and summarise their outcomes. Methods and analysis We will search databases and websites for peer-reviewed publications and grey literature on national health initiatives in high-income countries as defined by the World Bank. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies will be included and assessed for their methodological quality. Study selection, quality assessment and data extraction will be carried out independently by two reviewers. Narrative synthesis will be used to analyse the findings. Ethics and dissemination This systematic review analyses secondary data and ethical approval is not required. Review findings will be helpful to researchers, policy makers, governments and other key stakeholders developing similar initiatives and assessing cancer outcomes. The results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal in order to reach a diverse group of healthcare professionals, researchers and policy makers. This systematic review protocol is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42016047233). PMID:28698336

Scoping meta-review: introducing a new methodology.

PubMed

Sarrami-Foroushani, Pooria; Travaglia, Joanne; Debono, Deborah; Clay-Williams, Robyn; Braithwaite, Jeffrey

2015-02-01

For researchers, policymakers, and practitioners facing a new field, undertaking a systematic review can typically present a challenge due to the enormous number of relevant papers. A scoping review is a method suggested for addressing this dilemma; however, scoping reviews present their own challenges. This paper introduces the "scoping meta-review" (SMR) for expanding current methodologies and is based on our experiences in mapping the field of consumer engagement in healthcare. During this process, we developed the novel SMR method. An SMR combines aspects of a scoping review and a meta-review to establish an evidence-based map of a field. Similar to a scoping review, an SMR offers a practical and flexible methodology. However, unlike in a traditional scoping review, only systematic reviews are included. Stages of the SMR include: undertaking a preliminary nonsystematic review; building a search strategy; interrogating academic literature databases; classifying and excluding studies based on titles and abstracts; saving the refined database of references; revising the search strategy; selecting and reviewing the full text papers; and thematically analyzing the selected texts and writing the report. The main benefit of an SMR is to map a new field based on high-level evidence provided by systematic reviews. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Body fat in children measured by DXA, air-displacement plethysmography, TBW and multicomponent models: a systematic review.

PubMed

Zanini, Roberta de Vargas; Santos, Iná S; Chrestani, Maria Aurora D; Gigante, Denise Petrucci

2015-07-01

To conduct a systematic literature review to identify studies that used indirect methods to assess body fat in healthy children. A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. We conducted a search in the MEDLINE/PubMed, SciELO and Google Scholar databases. Studies in healthy children aged 0-9 years were eligible for inclusion. Studies were kept or excluded from the review according to eligibility criteria defined a priori. Two independent reviewers conducted all steps in the study selection. Initially, 11,246 articles were retrieved, with 3,593 duplicates. After applying the eligibility criteria, 22 articles were selected for review. The methodology of each study was analyzed by each reviewer individually. The indirect methods used to assess body fat in children included dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) (14 articles), air-displacement plethysmography (five articles), multicomponent models (two articles), and total body water (one article). Most studies reported absolute (in kilograms) or relative (percentage) body fat measures. Only seven studies reported the fat mass index (FMI) (kg/m(2)). DXA was the indirect method most frequently used to assess body fat in healthy children. FMI was seldom reported.

Technical Packages in Injury and Violence Prevention to Move Evidence into Practice: Systematic Reviews and Beyond

PubMed Central

Haegerich, Tamara M.; David-Ferdon, Corinne; Noonan, Rita K.; Manns, Brian J.; Billie, Holly C.

2016-01-01

Injury and violence prevention strategies have greater potential for impact when they are based on scientific evidence. Systematic reviews of the scientific evidence can contribute key information about which policies and programs might have the greatest impact when implemented. However, systematic reviews have limitations, such as lack of implementation guidance and contextual information, that can limit the application of knowledge. “Technical packages,” developed by knowledge brokers such as the federal government, nonprofit agencies, and academic institutions, have the potential to be an efficient mechanism for making information from systematic reviews actionable. Technical packages provide information about specific evidence-based prevention strategies, along with the estimated costs and impacts, and include accompanying implementation and evaluation guidance to facilitate adoption, implementation, and performance measurement. We describe how systematic reviews can inform the development of technical packages for practitioners, provide examples of technical packages in injury and violence prevention, and explain how enhancing review methods and reporting could facilitate the use and applicability of scientific evidence. PMID:27604301

The use of rapid review methods in health technology assessments: 3 case studies.

PubMed

Kaltenthaler, Eva; Cooper, Katy; Pandor, Abdullah; Martyn-St James, Marrissa; Chatters, Robin; Wong, Ruth

2016-08-26

Rapid reviews are of increasing importance within health technology assessment due to time and resource constraints. There are many rapid review methods available although there is little guidance as to the most suitable methods. We present three case studies employing differing methods to suit the evidence base for each review and outline some issues to consider when selecting an appropriate method. Three recently completed systematic review short reports produced for the UK National Institute for Health Research were examined. Different approaches to rapid review methods were used in the three reports which were undertaken to inform the commissioning of services within the NHS and to inform future trial design. We describe the methods used, the reasoning behind the choice of methods and explore the strengths and weaknesses of each method. Rapid review methods were chosen to meet the needs of the review and each review had distinctly different challenges such as heterogeneity in terms of populations, interventions, comparators and outcome measures (PICO) and/or large numbers of relevant trials. All reviews included at least 10 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), each with numerous included outcomes. For the first case study (sexual health interventions), very diverse studies in terms of PICO were included. P-values and summary information only were presented due to substantial heterogeneity between studies and outcomes measured. For the second case study (premature ejaculation treatments), there were over 100 RCTs but also several existing systematic reviews. Data for meta-analyses were extracted directly from existing systematic reviews with new RCT data added where available. For the final case study (cannabis cessation therapies), studies included a wide range of interventions and considerable variation in study populations and outcomes. A brief summary of the key findings for each study was presented and narrative synthesis used to summarise results for each pair of interventions compared. Rapid review methods need to be chosen to meet both the nature of the evidence base of a review and the challenges presented by the included studies. Appropriate methods should be chosen after an assessment of the evidence base.

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

Methods to improve rehabilitation of patients following breast cancer surgery: a review of systematic reviews

PubMed Central

Loh, Siew Yim; Musa, Aisya Nadia

2015-01-01

Context Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer amongst women but it has the highest survival rates amongst all cancer. Rehabilitation therapy of post-treatment effects from cancer and its treatment is needed to improve functioning and quality of life. This review investigated the range of methods for improving physical, psychosocial, occupational, and social wellbeing in women with breast cancer after receiving breast cancer surgery. Method A search for articles published in English between the years 2009 and 2014 was carried out using The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, PubMed, and ScienceDirect. Search terms included: ‘breast cancer’, ‘breast carcinoma’, ‘surgery’, ‘mastectomy’, ‘lumpectomy’, ‘breast conservation’, ‘axillary lymph node dissection’, ‘rehabilitation’, ‘therapy’, ‘physiotherapy’, ‘occupational therapy’, ‘psychological’, ‘psychosocial’, ‘psychotherapy’, ‘exercise’, ‘physical activity’, ‘cognitive’, ‘occupational’, ‘alternative’, ‘complementary’, and ‘systematic review’. Study selection Systematic reviews on the effectiveness of rehabilitation methods in improving post-operative physical, and psychological outcomes for breast cancer were selected. Sixteen articles met all the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. Data extraction Included review year, study aim, total number of participants included, and results. Data synthesis Evidence for exercise rehabilitation is predominantly in the improvement of shoulder mobility and limb strength. Inconclusive results exist for a range of rehabilitation methods (physical, psycho-education, nutritional, alternative-complementary methods) for addressing the domains of psychosocial, cognitive, and occupational outcomes. Conclusion There is good evidence for narrowly-focused exercise rehabilitation in improving physical outcome particularly for shoulder mobility and lymphedema. There were inconclusive results for methods to improve psychosocial, cognitive, and occupational outcomes. There were no reviews on broader performance areas and lifestyle factors to enable effective living after treatment. The review suggests that comprehensiveness and effectiveness of post-operative breast cancer rehabilitation should consider patients’ self-management approaches towards lifestyle redesign, and incorporate health promotion aspects, in light of the fact that breast cancer is now taking the form of a chronic illness with longer survivorship years. PMID:25792854

Worked examples of alternative methods for the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research in systematic reviews

PubMed Central

Lucas, Patricia J; Baird, Janis; Arai, Lisa; Law, Catherine; Roberts, Helen M

2007-01-01

Background The inclusion of qualitative studies in systematic reviews poses methodological challenges. This paper presents worked examples of two methods of data synthesis (textual narrative and thematic), used in relation to one review, with the aim of enabling researchers to consider the strength of different approaches. Methods A systematic review of lay perspectives of infant size and growth was conducted, locating 19 studies (including both qualitative and quantitative). The data extracted from these were synthesised using both a textual narrative and a thematic synthesis. Results The processes of both methods are presented, showing a stepwise progression to the final synthesis. Both methods led us to similar conclusions about lay views toward infant size and growth. Differences between methods lie in the way they dealt with study quality and heterogeneity. Conclusion On the basis of the work reported here, we consider textual narrative and thematic synthesis have strengths and weaknesses in relation to different research questions. Thematic synthesis holds most potential for hypothesis generation, but may obscure heterogeneity and quality appraisal. Textual narrative synthesis is better able to describe the scope of existing research and account for the strength of evidence, but is less good at identifying commonality. PMID:17224044

Abstract analysis method facilitates filtering low-methodological quality and high-bias risk systematic reviews on psoriasis interventions.

PubMed

Gómez-García, Francisco; Ruano, Juan; Aguilar-Luque, Macarena; Alcalde-Mellado, Patricia; Gay-Mimbrera, Jesús; Hernández-Romero, José Luis; Sanz-Cabanillas, Juan Luis; Maestre-López, Beatriz; González-Padilla, Marcelino; Carmona-Fernández, Pedro J; García-Nieto, Antonio Vélez; Isla-Tejera, Beatriz

2017-12-29

Article summaries' information and structure may influence researchers/clinicians' decisions to conduct deeper full-text analyses. Specifically, abstracts of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MA) should provide structured summaries for quick assessment. This study explored a method for determining the methodological quality and bias risk of full-text reviews using abstract information alone. Systematic literature searches for SRs and/or MA about psoriasis were undertaken on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane database. For each review, quality, abstract-reporting completeness, full-text methodological quality, and bias risk were evaluated using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses for abstracts (PRISMA-A), Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR), and ROBIS tools, respectively. Article-, author-, and journal-derived metadata were systematically extracted from eligible studies using a piloted template, and explanatory variables concerning abstract-reporting quality were assessed using univariate and multivariate-regression models. Two classification models concerning SRs' methodological quality and bias risk were developed based on per-item and total PRISMA-A scores and decision-tree algorithms. This work was supported, in part, by project ICI1400136 (JR). No funding was received from any pharmaceutical company. This study analysed 139 SRs on psoriasis interventions. On average, they featured 56.7% of PRISMA-A items. The mean total PRISMA-A score was significantly higher for high-methodological-quality SRs than for moderate- and low-methodological-quality reviews. SRs with low-bias risk showed higher total PRISMA-A values than reviews with high-bias risk. In the final model, only 'authors per review > 6' (OR: 1.098; 95%CI: 1.012-1.194), 'academic source of funding' (OR: 3.630; 95%CI: 1.788-7.542), and 'PRISMA-endorsed journal' (OR: 4.370; 95%CI: 1.785-10.98) predicted PRISMA-A variability. Reviews with a total PRISMA-A score < 6, lacking identification as SR or MA in the title, and lacking explanation concerning bias risk assessment methods were classified as low-methodological quality. Abstracts with a total PRISMA-A score ≥ 9, including main outcomes results and explanation bias risk assessment method were classified as having low-bias risk. The methodological quality and bias risk of SRs may be determined by abstract's quality and completeness analyses. Our proposal aimed to facilitate synthesis of evidence evaluation by clinical professionals lacking methodological skills. External validation is necessary.

Energy interventions that facilitate sustainable development and impact health: an overview of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Haby, Michelle M; Chapman, Evelina; Clark, Rachel; Galvão, Luiz A C

2016-04-01

Objective To inform policy by providing an overview of systematic reviews on interventions that facilitate sustainable energy use and have a positive impact on health. Methods Systematic review methods were used to synthesize evidence from multiple systematic reviews and economic evaluations through a comprehensive search of 13 databases and nine websites based on a pre-defined protocol, including clear inclusion criteria. Both grey and peer-reviewed literature published in English, Spanish, and Portuguese during the 17 years from January 1997 - January 2014 was included. To classify as "sustainable," interventions needed to aim to positively impact at least two dimensions of the integrated framework for sustainable development and include measures of health impact. Results Five systematic reviews and one economic evaluation met the inclusion criteria. The most promising interventions that impacted health were electricity for lighting and other uses (developing countries); improved stoves for cooking and health and/or cleaner fuels for cooking (developing countries); and household energy efficiency measures (developed countries). These interventions also had potential environmental and economic impacts. Their cost-effectiveness is not known, nor is their impact on health inequalities. Conclusions What is needed now is careful implementation of interventions where the impacts are likely to be positive but their implementation needs to be rigorously evaluated, including possible adverse impacts. Care needs to be taken not to exacerbate health inequalities and to consider context, human behavior and cultural factors so that the potential health benefits are realized in real-life implementation. Possible impact on health inequalities needs to be considered and measured in future primary studies and systematic reviews.

Are There Patterns of Bruising in Childhood Which Are Diagnostic or Suggestive of Abuse? A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Maguire, S.; Mann, M. K.; Sibert, J.; Kemp, A.

2005-01-01

Aims: To investigate what patterns of bruising are diagnostic or suggestive of child abuse by means of a systematic review. Methods: All language literature search 1951-2004. Included: studies that defined patterns of bruising in non-abused or abused children <18 years. Excluded: personal practice, review articles, single case reports, inadequate…

Review: A Systematic Review of Quality of Life Measures for People with Intellectual Disabilities and Challenging Behaviours

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Townsend-White, C.; Pham, A. N. T.; Vassos, M. V.

2012-01-01

Background: The quality of life (QOL) construct is proposed as a method to assess service outcomes for people utilising disability services. With this in mind, the aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of available QOL measures for people with intellectual disability (ID) to pinpoint psychometrically sound measures that can be…

Colic in infants

PubMed Central

2010-01-01

Introduction Colic in infants causes one in six families (17%) with children to consult a health professional. One systematic review of 15 community-based studies found a wide variation in prevalence, which depended on study design and method of recording. Methods and outcomes We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for colic in infants? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to September 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). Results We found 27 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions. Conclusions In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: advice to increase carrying, advice to reduce stimulation, casein hydrolysate milk, cranial osteopathy, crib vibrator device, focused counselling, gripe water, infant massage, low-lactose milk, simethicone, soya-based infant feeds, spinal manipulation, and whey hydrolysate milk. PMID:21729336

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, article mentions PRISMA, review includes comparison of interventions and review registration. The latter three variables were significant in multivariate regression. Conclusions There are gaps in the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews in paediatric surgery. More endorsement by journals of the PRISMA guideline may improve review quality, and the dissemination of reliable evidence to paediatric clinicians. PMID:28384296

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 .

Applicability and feasibility of systematic review for performing evidence-based risk assessment in food and feed safety.

PubMed

Aiassa, E; Higgins, J P T; Frampton, G K; Greiner, M; Afonso, A; Amzal, B; Deeks, J; Dorne, J-L; Glanville, J; Lövei, G L; Nienstedt, K; O'connor, A M; Pullin, A S; Rajić, A; Verloo, D

2015-01-01

Food and feed safety risk assessment uses multi-parameter models to evaluate the likelihood of adverse events associated with exposure to hazards in human health, plant health, animal health, animal welfare, and the environment. Systematic review and meta-analysis are established methods for answering questions in health care, and can be implemented to minimize biases in food and feed safety risk assessment. However, no methodological frameworks exist for refining risk assessment multi-parameter models into questions suitable for systematic review, and use of meta-analysis to estimate all parameters required by a risk model may not be always feasible. This paper describes novel approaches for determining question suitability and for prioritizing questions for systematic review in this area. Risk assessment questions that aim to estimate a parameter are likely to be suitable for systematic review. Such questions can be structured by their "key elements" [e.g., for intervention questions, the population(s), intervention(s), comparator(s), and outcome(s)]. Prioritization of questions to be addressed by systematic review relies on the likely impact and related uncertainty of individual parameters in the risk model. This approach to planning and prioritizing systematic review seems to have useful implications for producing evidence-based food and feed safety risk assessment.

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).

The librarian's roles in the systematic review process: a case study*

PubMed Central

Harris, Martha R.

2005-01-01

Question/Setting: Although the systematic review has become a research standard, little information addresses the actions of the librarian on a systematic review team. Method: This article is an observational case study that chronicles a librarian's required involvement, skills, and responsibilities in each stage of a real-life systematic review. Main Results: Examining the review process reveals that the librarian's multiple roles as an expert searcher, organizer, and analyzer form an integral part of the Cochrane Collaboration's criteria for conducting systematic reviews. Moreover, the responsibilities of the expert searcher directly reflect the key skills and knowledge depicted in the “Definition of Expert Searching” section of the Medical Library Association's policy statement, “Role of Expert Searching in Health Sciences Libraries.” Conclusion: Although the librarian's multiple roles are important in all forms of medical research, they are crucial in a systematic review. As an expert searcher, the librarian must interact with the investigators to develop the terms required for a comprehensive search strategy in multiple appropriate sources. As an organizer and analyzer, the librarian must effectively manage the articles and document the search, retrieval, and archival processes. PMID:15685279

Qualitative systematic reviews of treatment burden in stroke, heart failure and diabetes - methodological challenges and solutions.

PubMed

Gallacher, Katie; Jani, Bhautesh; Morrison, Deborah; Macdonald, Sara; Blane, David; Erwin, Patricia; May, Carl R; Montori, Victor M; Eton, David T; Smith, Fiona; Batty, G David; Batty, David G; Mair, Frances S

2013-01-28

Treatment burden can be defined as the self-care practices that patients with chronic illness must perform to respond to the requirements of their healthcare providers, as well as the impact that these practices have on patient functioning and well being. Increasing levels of treatment burden may lead to suboptimal adherence and negative outcomes. Systematic review of the qualitative literature is a useful method for exploring the patient experience of care, in this case the experience of treatment burden. There is no consensus on methods for qualitative systematic review. This paper describes the methodology used for qualitative systematic reviews of the treatment burdens identified in three different common chronic conditions, using stroke as our exemplar. Qualitative studies in peer reviewed journals seeking to understand the patient experience of stroke management were sought. Limitations of English language and year of publication 2000 onwards were set. An exhaustive search strategy was employed, consisting of a scoping search, database searches (Scopus, CINAHL, Embase, Medline & PsycINFO) and reference, footnote and citation searching. Papers were screened, data extracted, quality appraised and analysed by two individuals, with a third party for disagreements. Data analysis was carried out using a coding framework underpinned by Normalization Process Theory (NPT). A total of 4364 papers were identified, 54 were included in the review. Of these, 51 (94%) were retrieved from our database search. Methodological issues included: creating an appropriate search strategy; investigating a topic not previously conceptualised; sorting through irrelevant data within papers; the quality appraisal of qualitative research; and the use of NPT as a novel method of data analysis, shown to be a useful method for the purposes of this review. The creation of our search strategy may be of particular interest to other researchers carrying out synthesis of qualitative studies. Importantly, the successful use of NPT to inform a coding frame for data analysis involving qualitative data that describes processes relating to self management highlights the potential of a new method for analyses of qualitative data within systematic reviews.

Protocol - realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis: Evolving Standards (RAMESES)

PubMed Central

2011-01-01

Background There is growing interest in theory-driven, qualitative and mixed-method approaches to systematic review as an alternative to (or to extend and supplement) conventional Cochrane-style reviews. These approaches offer the potential to expand the knowledge base in policy-relevant areas - for example by explaining the success, failure or mixed fortunes of complex interventions. However, the quality of such reviews can be difficult to assess. This study aims to produce methodological guidance, publication standards and training resources for those seeking to use the realist and/or meta-narrative approach to systematic review. Methods/design We will: [a] collate and summarise existing literature on the principles of good practice in realist and meta-narrative systematic review; [b] consider the extent to which these principles have been followed by published and in-progress reviews, thereby identifying how rigour may be lost and how existing methods could be improved; [c] using an online Delphi method with an interdisciplinary panel of experts from academia and policy, produce a draft set of methodological steps and publication standards; [d] produce training materials with learning outcomes linked to these steps; [e] pilot these standards and training materials prospectively on real reviews-in-progress, capturing methodological and other challenges as they arise; [f] synthesise expert input, evidence review and real-time problem analysis into more definitive guidance and standards; [g] disseminate outputs to audiences in academia and policy. The outputs of the study will be threefold: 1. Quality standards and methodological guidance for realist and meta-narrative reviews for use by researchers, research sponsors, students and supervisors 2. A 'RAMESES' (Realist and Meta-review Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards) statement (comparable to CONSORT or PRISMA) of publication standards for such reviews, published in an open-access academic journal. 3. A training module for researchers, including learning outcomes, outline course materials and assessment criteria. Discussion Realist and meta-narrative review are relatively new approaches to systematic review whose overall place in the secondary research toolkit is not yet fully established. As with all secondary research methods, guidance on quality assurance and uniform reporting is an important step towards improving quality and consistency of studies. PMID:21843376

Use of a problem-based learning teaching model for undergraduate medical and nursing education: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PubMed Central

Sayyah, Mehdi; Shirbandi, Kiarash; Saki-Malehi, Amal; Rahim, Fakher

2017-01-01

Objectives The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the problem-based learning (PBL) method as an alternative to conventional educational methods in Iranian undergraduate medical courses. Materials and methods We systematically searched international datasets banks, including PubMed, Scopus, and Embase, and internal resources of banks, including MagirIran, IranMedex, IranDoc, and Scientific Information Database (SID), using appropriate search terms, such as “PBL”, “problem-based learning”, “based on problems”, “active learning”, and“ learner centered”, to identify PBL studies, and these were combined with other key terms such as “medical”, “undergraduate”, “Iranian”, “Islamic Republic of Iran”, “I.R. of Iran”, and “Iran”. The search included the period from 1980 to 2016 with no language limits. Results Overall, a total of 1,057 relevant studies were initially found, of which 21 studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Of the 21 studies, 12 (57.14%) had a high methodological quality. Considering the pooled effect size data, there was a significant difference in the scores (standardized mean difference [SMD]=0.80, 95% CI [0.52, 1.08], P<0.000) in favor of PBL, compared with the lecture-based method. Subgroup analysis revealed that using PBL alone is more favorable compared to using a mixed model with other learning methods such as lecture-based learning (LBL). Conclusion The results of this systematic review showed that using PBL may have a positive effect on the academic achievement of undergraduate medical courses. The results suggest that teachers and medical education decision makers give more attention on using this method for effective and proper training. PMID:29042827

The Effectiveness of Intensive Interaction, A Systematic Literature Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hutchinson, Nick; Bodicoat, Anna

2015-01-01

Background: Intensive Interaction is an approach used for communicating with people with profound and multiple intellectual disabilities [PMID] or autism. It has gained increased recognition as a helpful technique, but the evidence has not been systematically reviewed. Method: Computerized and hand searches of the literature were conducted using…

Hospital Admissions for Physical Health Conditions for People with Intellectual Disabilities: Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Dunn, Kirsty; Hughes-McCormack, Laura; Cooper, Sally-Ann

2018-01-01

Background: People with intellectual disabilities may have inequalities in hospital admissions compared with the general population. The present authors aimed to investigate admissions for physical health conditions in this population. Methods: The present authors conducted a systematic review, searching six databases using terms on intellectual…

Changing Multiple Adolescent Health Behaviors through School-Based Interventions: A Review of the Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Busch, Vincent; de Leeuw, Johannes Rob Josephus; de Harder, Alinda; Schrijvers, Augustinus Jacobus Petrus

2013-01-01

Background: In approaches to health promotion in adolescents, unhealthy behaviors are no longer regarded as independent processes, but as interrelated. This article presents a systematic literature review of school-based interventions targeting multiple adolescent behaviors simultaneously. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed…

Social Inclusion and People with Intellectual Disability and Challenging Behaviour: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bigby, Christine

2012-01-01

Background: Social inclusion is central to disability policies internationally. The high risk of social exclusion for people with intellectual disability is compounded for those with challenging behaviour. Method: A systematic literature review examined how social inclusion of people with intellectual disability and challenging behaviour has been…

Native American Youth and Culturally Sensitive Interventions: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Jackson, Kelly F.; Hodge, David R.

2010-01-01

Objective: A systematic evaluation of the effectiveness of culturally sensitive interventions (CSIs) with Native American youth was conducted. Method: Electronic bibliographic databases, Web sites, and manual searches were used to identify 11 outcome studies that examined CSI effectiveness with Native American youth. Results: This review found…

Smoking and Membership in a Fraternity or Sorority: A Systematic Review of the Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cheney, Marshall K.; Harris, LaNita W.; Gowin, Mary J.; Huber, Jamie

2014-01-01

Objective: Fraternity and sorority members have higher rates of smoking than other college students. This systematic review examines studies that included fraternity/sorority membership in their investigation of smoking behaviors. Participants/Methods: Studies identified in MEDLINE, PsychInfo, JSTOR, CINAHL, ERIC, and Google Scholar published…

Problem-Solving Therapy for Depression in Adults: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gellis, Zvi D.; Kenaley, Bonnie

2008-01-01

Objectives: This article presents a systematic review of the evidence on problem-solving therapy (PST) for depressive disorders in noninstitutionalized adults. Method: Intervention studies using randomized controlled designs are included and methodological quality is assessed using a standard set of criteria from the Cochrane Collaborative Review…

Biosocial Research in Social Work Journals: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Maynard, Brandy R.; Boutwell, Brian B.; Vaughn, Michael G.; Naeger, Sandra; Dell, Nathaniel

2018-01-01

Background: Despite an emphasis on a biopsychosocial understanding of human behavior and the relevance of biosocial research to social work practice, it is unclear whether social work is contributing to biosocial research and knowledge. Methods: Systematic review procedures were employed to locate studies that included biological variables (e.g.,…

Instruments Assessing Anxiety in Adults with Intellectual Disabilities: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hermans, Heidi; van der Pas, Femke H.; Evenhuis, Heleen M.

2011-01-01

Background: In the last decades several instruments measuring anxiety in adults with intellectual disabilities have been developed. Aim: To give an overview of the characteristics and psychometric properties of self-report and informant-report instruments measuring anxiety in this group. Method: Systematic review of the literature. Results:…

A Systematic Review of Strategies for Implementing Empirically Supported Mental Health Interventions

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Powell, Byron J.; Proctor, Enola K.; Glass, Joseph E.

2014-01-01

Objective: This systematic review examines experimental studies that test the effectiveness of strategies intended to integrate empirically supported mental health interventions into routine care settings. Our goal was to characterize the state of the literature and to provide direction for future implementation studies. Method: A literature…

Parenting Training for Intellectually Disabled Parents: A Cochrane Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Coren, Esther; Thomae, Manuela; Hutchfield, Jemeela

2011-01-01

Objectives: This article presents a Cochrane/Campbell systematic review of the evidence on the effect of parent training to support the parenting of parents with intellectual disabilities. Method: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing parent training interventions for parents with intellectual disability with usual care or with a control…

Is Video-Based Education an Effective Method in Surgical Education? A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Ahmet, Akgul; Gamze, Kus; Rustem, Mustafaoglu; Sezen, Karaborklu Argut

2018-02-12

Visual signs draw more attention during the learning process. Video is one of the most effective tool including a lot of visual cues. This systematic review set out to explore the influence of video in surgical education. We reviewed the current evidence for the video-based surgical education methods, discuss the advantages and disadvantages on the teaching of technical and nontechnical surgical skills. This systematic review was conducted according to the guidelines defined in the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement. The electronic databases: the Cochrane Library, Medline (PubMED), and ProQuest were searched from their inception to the 30 January 2016. The Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords used were "video," "education," and "surgery." We analyzed all full-texts, randomised and nonrandomised clinical trials and observational studies including video-based education methods about any surgery. "Education" means a medical resident's or student's training and teaching process; not patients' education. We did not impose restrictions about language or publication date. A total of nine articles which met inclusion criteria were included. These trials enrolled 507 participants and the total number of participants per trial ranged from 10 to 172. Nearly all of the studies reviewed report significant knowledge gain from video-based education techniques. The findings of this systematic review provide fair to good quality studies to demonstrate significant gains in knowledge compared with traditional teaching. Additional video to simulator exercise or 3D animations has beneficial effects on training time, learning duration, acquisition of surgical skills, and trainee's satisfaction. Video-based education has potential for use in surgical education as trainees face significant barriers in their practice. This method is effective according to the recent literature. Video should be used in addition to standard techniques in the surgical education. Copyright © 2018 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Setting priorities for knowledge translation of Cochrane reviews for health equity: Evidence for Equity.

PubMed

Tugwell, Peter; Petkovic, Jennifer; Welch, Vivian; Vincent, Jennifer; Bhutta, Zulfiqar A; Churchill, Rachel; deSavigny, Don; Mbuagbaw, Lawrence; Pantoja, Tomas

2017-12-02

A focus on equity in health can be seen in many global development goals and reports, research and international declarations. With the development of a relevant framework and methods, the Campbell and Cochrane Equity Methods Group has encouraged the application of an 'equity lens' to systematic reviews, and many organizations publish reviews intended to address health equity. The purpose of the Evidence for Equity (E4E) project was to conduct a priority-setting exercise and apply an equity lens by developing a knowledge translation product comprising summaries of systematic reviews from the Cochrane Library. E4E translates evidence from systematic reviews into 'friendly front end' summaries for policy makers. The following topic areas with high burdens of disease globally, were selected for the pilot: diabetes/obesity, HIV/AIDS, malaria, nutrition, and mental health/depression. For each topic area, a "stakeholder panel" was assembled that included policymakers and researchers. A systematic search of Cochrane reviews was conducted for each area to identify equity-relevant interventions with a meaningful impact. Panel chairs developed a rating sheet which was used by all panels to rank the importance of these interventions by: 1) Ease of Implementation; 2) Health System Requirements; 3)Universality/Generalizability/Share of Burden; and 4) Impact on Inequities/Effect on equity. The ratings of panel members were averaged for each intervention and criterion, and interventions were ordered according to the average overall ratings. Stakeholder panels identified the top 10 interventions from their respective topic areas. The evidence on these interventions is being summarized with an equity focus and the results posted online, at http://methods.cochrane.org/equity/e4e-series . This method provides an explicit approach to setting priorities by systematic review groups and funders for providing decision makers with evidence for the most important equity-relevant interventions.

Quality of life among dermatology patients: a systematic review of investigations using qualitative methods.

PubMed

Singh, Sanminder; Ehsani-Chimeh, Nazanin; Kornmehl, Heather; Armstrong, April W

2017-07-13

Quality of life may be assessed using quantitative or qualitative methods. Quantitative methods are commonly used in research settings; however, they may fail to capture the full range of patient experiences and impact on quality of life. Qualitative methods may be used to address this limitation. In this systematic review, we aim to synthesize data from articles utilizing qualitative methods to assess quality of life in dermatology patients. We performed a systematic review search using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases. The search was conducted using the following search criteria: ("Dermatology" [MeSH]) AND ("Quality of Life" [MeSH]), AND ("Qualitative Research" [MeSH]), searching literature spanning from January 1, 1946- October 5, 2016. The systematic review of 15 articles included 533 dermatology patients. Patients expressed frustration over the unpredictability of disease symptoms and having to compensate for the subsequent limitations by altering their daily routines. Patients also reported profound helplessness due to chronic skin disease and social isolation in an effort to hide their disease. Patients noted the patient-provider relationship as a source of support and information exchange, with the goal to form easy to use treatment plans that met both physician and patient expectations. Qualitative assessment of patient quality of life can provide new insights into the patient experience and the impact of their skin disease. Qualitative methodology may capture meaningful information that may be overlooked by quantitative methods, and it should be included in quality of life research.

Systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses: part 6 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications.

PubMed

Ressing, Meike; Blettner, Maria; Klug, Stefanie J

2009-07-01

Because of the rising number of scientific publications, it is important to have a means of jointly summarizing and assessing different studies on a single topic. Systematic literature reviews, meta-analyses of published data, and meta-analyses of individual data (pooled reanalyses) are now being published with increasing frequency. We here describe the essential features of these methods and discuss their strengths and weaknesses. This article is based on a selective literature search. The different types of review and meta-analysis are described, the methods used in each are outlined so that they can be evaluated, and a checklist is given for the assessment of reviews and meta-analyses of scientific articles. Systematic literature reviews provide an overview of the state of research on a given topic and enable an assessment of the quality of individual studies. They also allow the results of different studies to be evaluated together when these are inconsistent. Meta-analyses additionally allow calculation of pooled estimates of an effect. The different types of review and meta-analysis are discussed with examples from the literature on one particular topic. Systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses enable the research findings and treatment effects obtained in different individual studies to be summed up and evaluated.

Behavioural and Autonomic Regulation of Response to Sensory Stimuli among Children: A Systematic Review of Relationship and Methodology

PubMed Central

Morato-Espino, Paulin Grace; Chan, Chetwyn C. H.; Tsang, Hector W. H.

2017-01-01

Background Previous studies have explored the correlates of behavioural and autonomic regulation of response to sensory stimuli in children; however, a comprehensive review of such relationship is lacking. This systematic review was performed to critically appraise the current evidence on such relationship and describe the methods used in these studies. Methods Online databases were systematically searched for peer-reviewed, full-text articles in the English language between 1999 and 2016, initially screened by title and abstract, and appraised and synthesized by two independent review authors. Results Fourteen Level III-3 cross-sectional studies were included for systematic review, among which six studies explored the relationship between behaviour and physiological regulation of responses to sensory stimuli. Three studies reported significant positive weak correlations among ASD children; however, no correlations were found in typically developing children. Methodological differences related to individual differences among participants, measures used, and varied laboratory experimental setting were noted. Conclusion This review suggests inconclusive evidence supporting the relationship between behavioural and physiological regulation of responses to sensory stimuli among children. Methodological differences may likely have confounded the results of the current evidence. We present methodological recommendations to address this matter for future researches. This trial is registered with PROSPERO registration number CRD42016043887. PMID:29333436

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 suitable for use within a systematic review of medication adherence interventions and offered insights beyond the single dimension stratifications used in the original completed review. Future prospective use of QCA during a review is needed to determine the optimal way to efficiently integrate QCA into existing approaches to evidence synthesis of complex interventions.

Prospective systematic review registration: perspective from the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N).

PubMed

Van der Wees, Philip; Qaseem, Amir; Kaila, Minna; Ollenschlaeger, Guenter; Rosenfeld, Richard

2012-02-09

Clinical practice and public health guidelines are important tools for translating research findings into practice with the aim of assisting health practitioners as well as patients and consumers in health behavior and healthcare decision-making. Numerous programs for guideline development exist around the world, with growing international collaboration to improve their quality. One of the key features in developing trustworthy guidelines is that recommendations should be based on high-quality systematic reviews of the best available evidence. The review process used by guideline developers to identify and grade relevant evidence for developing recommendations should be systematic, transparent and unbiased. In this paper, we provide an overview of current international developments in the field of practice guidelines and methods to develop guidelines, with a specific focus on the role of systematic reviews. The Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) aims to stimulate collaboration between guideline developers and systematic reviewers to optimize the use of available evidence in guideline development and to increase efficiency in the guideline development process. Considering the significant benefit of systematic reviews for the guideline community, the G-I-N Board of Trustees supports the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) initiative. G-I-N also recently launched a Data Extraction Resource (GINDER) to present and share data extracted from individual studies in a standardized template. PROSPERO and GINDER are complementary tools to enhance collaboration between guideline developers and systematic reviewers to allow for alignment of activities and a reduction in duplication of effort.

Capacity for conducting systematic reviews in low- and middle-income countries: a rapid appraisal.

PubMed

Oliver, Sandy; Bangpan, Mukdarut; Stansfield, Claire; Stewart, Ruth

2015-04-26

Systematic reviews of research are increasingly recognised as important for informing decisions across policy sectors and for setting priorities for research. Although reviews draw on international research, the host institutions and countries can focus attention on their own priorities. The uneven capacity for conducting research around the world raises questions about the capacity for conducting systematic reviews. A rapid appraisal was conducted of current capacity and capacity strengthening activities for conducting systematic reviews in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). A systems approach to analysis considered the capacity of individuals nested within the larger units of research teams, institutions that fund, support, and/or conduct systematic reviews, and systems that support systematic reviewing internationally. International systematic review networks, and their support organisations, are dominated by members from high-income countries. The largest network comprising a skilled workforce and established centres is the Cochrane Collaboration. Other networks, although smaller, provide support for systematic reviews addressing questions beyond effective clinical practice which require a broader range of methods. Capacity constraints were apparent at the levels of individuals, review teams, organisations, and system wide. Constraints at each level limited the capacity at levels nested within them. Skills training for individuals had limited utility if not allied to opportunities for review teams to practice the skills. Skills development was further constrained by language barriers, lack of support from academic organisations, and the limitations of wider systems for communication and knowledge management. All networks hosted some activities for strengthening the capacities of individuals and teams, although these were usually independent of core academic programmes and traditional career progression. Even rarer were efforts to increase demand for systematic reviews and to strengthen links between producers and potential users of systematic reviews. Limited capacity for conducting systematic reviews within LMICs presents a major technical and social challenge to advancing their health systems. Effective capacity in LMICs can be spread through investing effort at multiple levels simultaneously, supported by countries (predominantly high-income countries) with established skills and experience.

Topic detection using paragraph vectors to support active learning in systematic reviews.

PubMed

Hashimoto, Kazuma; Kontonatsios, Georgios; Miwa, Makoto; Ananiadou, Sophia

2016-08-01

Systematic reviews require expert reviewers to manually screen thousands of citations in order to identify all relevant articles to the review. Active learning text classification is a supervised machine learning approach that has been shown to significantly reduce the manual annotation workload by semi-automating the citation screening process of systematic reviews. In this paper, we present a new topic detection method that induces an informative representation of studies, to improve the performance of the underlying active learner. Our proposed topic detection method uses a neural network-based vector space model to capture semantic similarities between documents. We firstly represent documents within the vector space, and cluster the documents into a predefined number of clusters. The centroids of the clusters are treated as latent topics. We then represent each document as a mixture of latent topics. For evaluation purposes, we employ the active learning strategy using both our novel topic detection method and a baseline topic model (i.e., Latent Dirichlet Allocation). Results obtained demonstrate that our method is able to achieve a high sensitivity of eligible studies and a significantly reduced manual annotation cost when compared to the baseline method. This observation is consistent across two clinical and three public health reviews. The tool introduced in this work is available from https://nactem.ac.uk/pvtopic/. Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Search Wide, Dig Deep: Literature Searching for Qualitative Research. An Analysis of the Publication Formats and Information Sources Used for Four Systematic Reviews in Public Health

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Stansfield, Claire; Brunton, Ginny; Rees, Rebecca

2014-01-01

Background: When literature searching for systematic reviews, it is good practice to search widely across different information sources. Little is known about the contributions of different publication formats (e.g. journal article and book chapter) and sources, especially for studies of people's views. Method: Studies from four reviews spanning…

Worked examples of alternative methods for the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research in systematic reviews.

PubMed

Lucas, Patricia J; Baird, Janis; Arai, Lisa; Law, Catherine; Roberts, Helen M

2007-01-15

The inclusion of qualitative studies in systematic reviews poses methodological challenges. This paper presents worked examples of two methods of data synthesis (textual narrative and thematic), used in relation to one review, with the aim of enabling researchers to consider the strength of different approaches. A systematic review of lay perspectives of infant size and growth was conducted, locating 19 studies (including both qualitative and quantitative). The data extracted from these were synthesised using both a textual narrative and a thematic synthesis. The processes of both methods are presented, showing a stepwise progression to the final synthesis. Both methods led us to similar conclusions about lay views toward infant size and growth. Differences between methods lie in the way they dealt with study quality and heterogeneity. On the basis of the work reported here, we consider textual narrative and thematic synthesis have strengths and weaknesses in relation to different research questions. Thematic synthesis holds most potential for hypothesis generation, but may obscure heterogeneity and quality appraisal. Textual narrative synthesis is better able to describe the scope of existing research and account for the strength of evidence, but is less good at identifying commonality.

Exploiting the systematic review protocol for classification of medical abstracts.

PubMed

Frunza, Oana; Inkpen, Diana; Matwin, Stan; Klement, William; O'Blenis, Peter

2011-01-01

To determine whether the automatic classification of documents can be useful in systematic reviews on medical topics, and specifically if the performance of the automatic classification can be enhanced by using the particular protocol of questions employed by the human reviewers to create multiple classifiers. The test collection is the data used in large-scale systematic review on the topic of the dissemination strategy of health care services for elderly people. From a group of 47,274 abstracts marked by human reviewers to be included in or excluded from further screening, we randomly selected 20,000 as a training set, with the remaining 27,274 becoming a separate test set. As a machine learning algorithm we used complement naïve Bayes. We tested both a global classification method, where a single classifier is trained on instances of abstracts and their classification (i.e., included or excluded), and a novel per-question classification method that trains multiple classifiers for each abstract, exploiting the specific protocol (questions) of the systematic review. For the per-question method we tested four ways of combining the results of the classifiers trained for the individual questions. As evaluation measures, we calculated precision and recall for several settings of the two methods. It is most important not to exclude any relevant documents (i.e., to attain high recall for the class of interest) but also desirable to exclude most of the non-relevant documents (i.e., to attain high precision on the class of interest) in order to reduce human workload. For the global method, the highest recall was 67.8% and the highest precision was 37.9%. For the per-question method, the highest recall was 99.2%, and the highest precision was 63%. The human-machine workflow proposed in this paper achieved a recall value of 99.6%, and a precision value of 17.8%. The per-question method that combines classifiers following the specific protocol of the review leads to better results than the global method in terms of recall. Because neither method is efficient enough to classify abstracts reliably by itself, the technology should be applied in a semi-automatic way, with a human expert still involved. When the workflow includes one human expert and the trained automatic classifier, recall improves to an acceptable level, showing that automatic classification techniques can reduce the human workload in the process of building a systematic review. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

A Systematic Overview of Reviews for Complementary and Alternative Therapies in the Treatment of the Fibromyalgia Syndrome

PubMed Central

Häuser, Winfried; Dobos, Gustav; Langhorst, Jost

2015-01-01

Objectives. This systematic overview of reviews aimed to summarize evidence and methodological quality from systematic reviews of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for the fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). Methods. The PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases were screened from their inception to Sept 2013 to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of CAM interventions for FMS. Methodological quality of reviews was rated using the AMSTAR instrument. Results. Altogether 25 systematic reviews were found; they investigated the evidence of CAM in general, exercised-based CAM therapies, manipulative therapies, Mind/Body therapies, acupuncture, hydrotherapy, phytotherapy, and homeopathy. Methodological quality of reviews ranged from lowest to highest possible quality. Consistently positive results were found for tai chi, yoga, meditation and mindfulness-based interventions, hypnosis or guided imagery, electromyogram (EMG) biofeedback, and balneotherapy/hydrotherapy. Inconsistent results concerned qigong, acupuncture, chiropractic interventions, electroencephalogram (EEG) biofeedback, and nutritional supplements. Inconclusive results were found for homeopathy and phytotherapy. Major methodological flaws included missing details on data extraction process, included or excluded studies, study details, and adaption of conclusions based on quality assessment. Conclusions. Despite a growing body of scientific evidence of CAM therapies for the management of FMS systematic reviews still show methodological flaws limiting definite conclusions about their efficacy and safety. PMID:26246841

A Systematic Overview of Reviews for Complementary and Alternative Therapies in the Treatment of the Fibromyalgia Syndrome.

PubMed

Lauche, Romy; Cramer, Holger; Häuser, Winfried; Dobos, Gustav; Langhorst, Jost

2015-01-01

Objectives. This systematic overview of reviews aimed to summarize evidence and methodological quality from systematic reviews of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for the fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). Methods. The PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases were screened from their inception to Sept 2013 to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of CAM interventions for FMS. Methodological quality of reviews was rated using the AMSTAR instrument. Results. Altogether 25 systematic reviews were found; they investigated the evidence of CAM in general, exercised-based CAM therapies, manipulative therapies, Mind/Body therapies, acupuncture, hydrotherapy, phytotherapy, and homeopathy. Methodological quality of reviews ranged from lowest to highest possible quality. Consistently positive results were found for tai chi, yoga, meditation and mindfulness-based interventions, hypnosis or guided imagery, electromyogram (EMG) biofeedback, and balneotherapy/hydrotherapy. Inconsistent results concerned qigong, acupuncture, chiropractic interventions, electroencephalogram (EEG) biofeedback, and nutritional supplements. Inconclusive results were found for homeopathy and phytotherapy. Major methodological flaws included missing details on data extraction process, included or excluded studies, study details, and adaption of conclusions based on quality assessment. Conclusions. Despite a growing body of scientific evidence of CAM therapies for the management of FMS systematic reviews still show methodological flaws limiting definite conclusions about their efficacy and safety.

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

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.

Environmental scan and evaluation of best practices for online systematic review resources

PubMed Central

Parker, Robin M. N.; Boulos, Leah M.; Visintini, Sarah; Ritchie, Krista; Hayden, Jill

2018-01-01

Objective Online training for systematic review methodology is an attractive option due to flexibility and limited availability of in-person instruction. Librarians often direct new reviewers to these online resources, so they should be knowledgeable about the variety of available resources. The objective for this project was to conduct an environmental scan of online systematic review training resources and evaluate those identified resources. Methods The authors systematically searched for electronic learning resources pertaining to systematic review methods. After screening for inclusion, we collected data about characteristics of training resources and assigned scores in the domains of (1) content, (2) design, (3) interactivity, and (4) usability by applying a previously published evaluation rubric for online instruction modules. We described the characteristics and scores for each training resource and compared performance across the domains. Results Twenty training resources were evaluated. Average overall score of online instructional resources was 61%. Online courses (n=7) averaged 73%, web modules (n=5) 64%, and videos (n=8) 48%. The top 5 highest scoring resources were in course or web module format, featured high interactivity, and required a longer (>5hrs) time commitment from users. Conclusion This study revealed that resources include appropriate content but are less likely to adhere to principles of online training design and interactivity. Awareness of these resources will allow librarians to make informed recommendations for training based on patrons’ needs. Future online systematic review training resources should use established best practices for e-learning to provide high-quality resources, regardless of format or user time commitment. PMID:29632443

[Montessori method applied to dementia - literature review].

PubMed

Brandão, Daniela Filipa Soares; Martín, José Ignacio

2012-06-01

The Montessori method was initially applied to children, but now it has also been applied to people with dementia. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the research on the effectiveness of this method using Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (Medline) with the keywords dementia and Montessori method. We selected lo studies, in which there were significant improvements in participation and constructive engagement, and reduction of negative affects and passive engagement. Nevertheless, systematic reviews about this non-pharmacological intervention in dementia rate this method as weak in terms of effectiveness. This apparent discrepancy can be explained because the Montessori method may have, in fact, a small influence on dimensions such as behavioral problems, or because there is no research about this method with high levels of control, such as the presence of several control groups or a double-blind study.

Review of reviews on exposures to synthetic organic chemicals and children's neurodevelopment: Methodological and interpretation challenges.

PubMed

LaKind, Judy S; Anthony, Laura G; Goodman, Michael

2017-01-01

Environmental epidemiology data are becoming increasingly important in public health decision making, which commonly incorporates a systematic review of multiple studies. This review addresses two fundamental questions: What is the quality of available reviews on associations between exposure to synthetic organic chemicals and neurodevelopmental outcomes? What is the value (e.g., quality and consistency) of the underlying literature? Published reviews on associations between synthetic organic environmental chemical exposures and neurodevelopmental outcomes in children were systematically evaluated. Seventy-four relevant reviews were identified, and these were evaluated with respect to four methodological characteristics: (1) systematic inclusion/exclusion criteria and reproducible methods for search and retrieval of studies; (2) structured evaluation of underlying data quality; (3) systematic assessment of consistency across specific exposure-outcome associations; and (4) evaluation of reporting/publication bias. None of the 74 reviews fully met the criteria for all four methodological characteristics. Only four reviews met two criteria, and six reviews fulfilled only one criterion. Perhaps more importantly, the higher quality reviews were not able to meet all of the criteria owing to the shortcomings of underlying studies, which lacked comparability in terms of specific research question of interest, overall design, exposure assessment, outcome ascertainment, and analytic methods. Thus, even the most thoughtful and rigorous review may be of limited value if the underlying literature includes investigations that address different hypotheses and are beset by methodological inconsistencies and limitations. Issues identified in this review of reviews illustrate considerable challenges that are facing assessments of epidemiological evidence.

Determinants of seat belt use behaviour: a protocol for a systematic review

PubMed Central

Ghaffari, Mohtasham; Armoon, Bahram; Rakhshanderou, Sakineh; Mehrabi, Yadollah; Soori, Hamid; Simsekoghlu, Ozelem; Harooni, Javad

2018-01-01

Introduction The use of seat belts could prevent severe collision damage to people in vehicle accidents and keep passengers safe from sustaining serious injuries; for instance, it could prevent passengers from being thrown out of a vehicle after the collision. The current systematic review will identify and analyse the determinants of seat belt use behaviour. Methods and analysis We will include qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies reporting the acquired data from passengers aged more than 12 years and drivers, from both commercial and personal vehicles. Online databases including MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and PsycINFO will be investigated in the current study. Published and available articles will be evaluated according to their titles and abstracts. Published papers conforming to the inclusion criteria will be organised for a complete review. Next, the full text of the remaining articles will be studied independently for eligibility by two authors. The quality of the selected studies will be assessed with appropriate tools. Based on the information obtained from the data extraction, the type of determinants of seat belt use will be classified. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval is not required, because this is a protocol for a systematic review and no primary data will be collected. The authors will ensure to maintain the rights of the used and included articles in the present systematic review. The findings of this review will be published in a relevant peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017067511. PMID:29724739

Impact of point-of-care diagnostics on maternal outcomes in HIV-infected women: systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

PubMed Central

Mashamba-Thompson, T P; Sartorius, B; Thabane, L; Shi, C X; Drain, P K

2016-01-01

Introduction Studies indicate substandard diagnostic care, delayed and missed diagnosis as some of the contributing factors to maternal mortality. The clinical impact of point-of-care (POC) diagnostics has been shown in the monitoring and treatment of a variety of infectious diseases, including HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis. The objective of this systematic review is to investigate the impact of POC diagnostics on maternal outcomes for HIV-infected women. Methods We will conduct a systematic review to evaluate the impact of POC diagnostics for improving desired healthcare outcomes for HIV-infected women. The search strategy will involve electronic databases including: Cochrane Infectious Disease Group Specialised Register; Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials, published in The Cochrane Library; PubMed; EBSCOhost and LILACS. The studies will be mapped in 2 stages: stage 1 will map studies descriptively by focus and method; stage 2 will involve additional inclusion criteria, quality assessment and data extraction undertaken by 2 reviewers in parallel. Evidence will be synthesised using relevant systematic research tools: meta-analysis and subgroup analysis will be conducted using RevMan and Stata 13 will be used for meta-regressions. We will follow recommendations described in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and the Cochrane Handbook for Intervention Reviews. Ethics and dissemination We anticipate finding a large number of studies on POC diagnostic interventions on maternal outcomes in HIV-infected women, which, once summarised, will be useful to guide future diagnostic interventions. The protocol for the systematic review has been registered in PROSPERO. The study will be disseminated electronically and in print. It will also be presented to conferences related to HIV/AIDS, POC diagnostics and maternal health. Trial registration number PROSPERO CRD42014015439. PMID:26817633

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 coefficient 1·4; 95%CI: 0·4, 2·4; PRISMA regression coefficient 3·4; 95% CI: 0·9, 5·8). The methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews in burn care requires further improvement with stricter adherence by authors to the PRISMA checklist and AMSTAR tool. © 2016 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Acoustic Analysis of Voice in Singers: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gunjawate, Dhanshree R.; Ravi, Rohit; Bellur, Rajashekhar

2018-01-01

Purpose: Singers are vocal athletes having specific demands from their voice and require special consideration during voice evaluation. Presently, there is a lack of standards for acoustic evaluation in them. The aim of the present study was to systematically review the available literature on the acoustic analysis of voice in singers. Method: A…

Mindfulness-Based Approaches in the Treatment of Disordered Gambling: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Maynard, Brandy R.; Wilson, Alyssa N.; Labuzienski, Elizabeth; Whiting, Seth W.

2018-01-01

Background and Aims: To examine the effects of mindfulness-based interventions on gambling behavior and symptoms, urges, and financial outcomes. Method: Systematic review and meta-analytic procedures were employed to search, select, code, and analyze studies conducted between 1980 and 2014, assessing the effects of mindfulness-based interventions…

School-Based Mentoring for Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wood, Sarah; Mayo-Wilson, Evan

2012-01-01

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of school-based mentoring for adolescents (11-18 years) on academic performance, attendance, attitudes, behavior, and self-esteem. Method: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The authors searched 12 databases from 1980 to 2011. Eight studies with 6,072 participants were included, 6 were included in…

The Association of Physical Activity and Academic Behavior: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Sullivan, Rachel A.; Kuzel, AnnMarie H.; Vaandering, Michael E.; Chen, Weiyun

2017-01-01

Background: In this systematic review, we assessed the existing research describing the effects of physical activity (PA) on academic behavior, with a special focus on the effectiveness of the treatments applied, study designs, outcome measures, and results. Methods: We obtained data from various journal search engines and 218 journal articles…

Effect of Active Lessons on Physical Activity, Academic, and Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Martin, Rosemarie; Murtagh, Elaine M.

2017-01-01

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of classroom-based physical activity interventions that integrate academic content and assess the effectiveness of the interventions on physical activity, learning, facilitators of learning, and health outcomes. Method: Six electronic databases (ERIC, PubMed, Google Scholar,…

Strategies for Implementing School-Located Influenza Vaccination of Children: A Systematic Literature Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cawley, John; Hull, Harry F.; Rousculp, Matthew D.

2010-01-01

Background: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends influenza vaccinations for all children 6 months to 18 years of age, which includes school-aged children. Influenza immunization programs may benefit schools by reducing absenteeism. Methods: A systematic literature review of PubMed, PsychLit, and Dissertation Abstracts…

Treatment for School Refusal among Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Maynard, Brandy R.; Heyne, David; Brendel, Kristen Esposito; Bulanda, Jeffery J.; Thompson, Aaron M.; Pigott, Terri D.

2018-01-01

Objective: School refusal is a psychosocial problem associated with adverse short- and long-term consequences for children and adolescents. The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the effects of psychosocial treatments for children and adolescents with school refusal. Method: A comprehensive search process was used…

Physical Conditions and Challenging Behaviour in People with Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

de Winter, C. F.; Jansen, A. A. C.; Evenhuis, H. M.

2011-01-01

Background: Challenging behaviour is a major problem among people with intellectual disabilities. Physical factors may be an important cause. The aim of the present systematic review was to determine the physical conditions associated with challenging behaviour. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed and the Cochrane systematic…

Physical Activity Measurement Instruments for Children with Cerebral Palsy: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Capio, Catherine M.; Sit, Cindy H. P.; Abernethy, Bruce; Rotor, Esmerita R.

2010-01-01

Aim: This paper is a systematic review of physical activity measurement instruments for field-based studies involving children with cerebral palsy (CP). Method: Database searches using PubMed Central, MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and PEDro located 12 research papers, identifying seven instruments that met the inclusion…

Standardized Tests of Handwriting Readiness: A Systematic Review of the Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

van Hartingsveldt, Margo J.; de Groot, Imelda J. M.; Aarts, Pauline B. M.; Nijhuis-van der Sanden, Maria W. G.

2011-01-01

Aim: To establish if there are psychometrically sound standardized tests or test items to assess handwriting readiness in 5- and 6-year-old children on the levels of occupations activities/tasks and performance. Method: Electronic databases were searched to identify measurement instruments. Tests were included in a systematic review if: (1)…

Voice Disorders in Teachers and Their Associations with Work-Related Factors: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cutiva, Lady Catherine Cantor; Vogel, Ineke; Burdorf, Alex

2013-01-01

Purpose: To provide a quantitative assessment of the occurrence of voice disorders among teachers and to identify associated work-related and individual factors in the teaching profession. Method: A systematic review was conducted using three computerized databases on the occurrence of voice disorders among teachers and their associations with…

A Systematic Review of Training Programs for Parents of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Single Subject Contributions

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Patterson, Stephanie Y.; Smith, Veronica; Mirenda, Pat

2012-01-01

Aim: The purpose of this systematic review was to examine research utilizing single subject research designs (SSRD) to explore the effectiveness of interventions designed to increase parents' ability to support communication and social development in children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). Method: Included studies were systematically…

Evidence-Based Practice for the Use of Internal Strategies as a Memory Compensation Technique After Brain Injury: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

OʼNeil-Pirozzi, Therese M; Kennedy, Mary R T; Sohlberg, McKay M

2016-01-01

To complete a systematic review of internal memory strategy use with people who have brain injury and provide practitioners with information that will impact their clinical work. A systematic literature search to identify published intervention studies that evaluated an internal memory strategy or technique to improve memory function of individuals with brain injury. Relevant data from reviewed articles were coded using 4 clinical questions targeting participants, interventions, research methods, and outcomes. A comprehensive search identified 130 study citations and abstracts. Forty-six met inclusion/exclusion criteria and were systematically reviewed. Visual imagery was most frequently studied, in isolation or in combination with other internal strategies. Despite significant variability in research methods and outcomes across studies, the evidence provides impetus for use of internal memory strategies with individuals following brain injury. Individuals with traumatic brain injury may benefit from internal memory strategy use, and clinicians should consider internal memory strategy instruction as part of intervention plans. Further research needs to better delineate influences on intervention candidacy and outcomes.

Protocol for a systematic review of quantitative burn wound microbiology in the management of burns patients.

PubMed

Kwei, Johnny; Halstead, Fenella D; Dretzke, Janine; Oppenheim, Beryl A; Moiemen, Naiem S

2015-11-06

Sepsis from burn injuries can result from colonisation of burn wounds, especially in large surface area burns. Reducing bacterial infection will reduce morbidity and mortality, and mortality for severe burns can be as high as 15 %. There are various quantitative and semi-quantitative techniques to monitor bacterial load on wounds. In the UK, burn wounds are typically monitored for the presence or absence of bacteria through the collection and culture of swabs, but no absolute count is obtained. Quantitative burn wound culture provides a measure of bacterial count and is gaining increased popularity in some countries. It is however more resource intensive, and evidence for its utility appears to be inconsistent. This systematic review therefore aims to assess the evidence on the utility and reliability of different quantitative microbiology techniques in terms of diagnosing or predicting clinical outcomes. Standard systematic review methods aimed at minimising bias will be employed for study identification, selection and data extraction. Bibliographic databases and ongoing trial registers will be searched and conference abstracts screened. Studies will be eligible if they are prospective studies or systematic reviews of burn patients (any age) for whom quantitative microbiology has been performed, whether it is compared to another method. Quality assessment will be based on quality assessment tools for diagnostic and prognostic studies and tailored to the review as necessary. Synthesis is likely to be primarily narrative, but meta-analysis may be considered where clinical and methodological homogeneity exists. Given the increasing use of quantitative methods, this is a timely systematic review, which will attempt to clarify the evidence base. As far as the authors are aware, it will be the first to address this topic. PROSPERO, CRD42015023903.

Investing in updating: how do conclusions change when Cochrane systematic reviews are updated?

PubMed Central

French, Simon D; McDonald, Steve; McKenzie, Joanne E; Green, Sally E

2005-01-01

Background Cochrane systematic reviews aim to provide readers with the most up-to-date evidence on the effects of healthcare interventions. The policy of updating Cochrane reviews every two years consumes valuable time and resources and may not be appropriate for all reviews. The objective of this study was to examine the effect of updating Cochrane systematic reviews over a four year period. Methods This descriptive study examined all completed systematic reviews in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) Issue 2, 1998. The latest version of each of these reviews was then identified in CDSR Issue 2, 2002 and changes in the review were described. For reviews that were updated within this time period and had additional studies, we determined whether their conclusion had changed and if there were factors that were predictive of this change. Results A total of 377 complete reviews were published in CDSR Issue 2, 1998. In Issue 2, 2002, 14 of these reviews were withdrawn and one was split, leaving 362 reviews to examine for the purpose of this study. Of these reviews, 254 (70%) were updated. Of these updated reviews, 23 (9%) had a change in conclusion. Both an increase in precision and a change in statistical significance of the primary outcome were predictive of a change in conclusion of the review. Conclusion The concerns around a lack of updating for some reviews may not be justified considering the small proportion of updated reviews that resulted in a changed conclusion. A priority-setting approach to the updating of Cochrane systematic reviews may be more appropriate than a time-based approach. Updating all reviews as frequently as every two years may not be necessary, however some reviews may need to be updated more often than every two years. PMID:16225692

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 review processes. All types of reports and evaluations were eligible. Included studies were combined in a narrative synthesis structured by the level of evaluation and the type of involvement. Results We identified 36 relevant studies. Eleven of these were evaluations at the level of a whole organisation; seven of these studied consumer involvement in Cochrane. Ten studies examined individual Cochrane review groups. Twelve studies reported on individual reviews; only two of these were Cochrane reviews. Finally, three studies were themselves syntheses of other studies. The included studies reported varying levels of consumer involvement across a wide range of activities related to review design and conduct. These included activities such as priority setting and outcome definition as well as review-specific roles such as acting as peer referees and producing plain language summaries. The level of satisfaction and awareness of impact was generally higher in studies focused on individual Cochrane review groups than in the organisation-wide studies. Conclusions There was evidence of highly variable levels and types of consumer involvement within and beyond Cochrane, but limited evidence for what makes the most effective methods and levels of involving consumers in review production. Where evidence of impact was found at the level of individual reviews and review groups it underlined the need for properly resourced and supported processes in order to derive the greatest benefit from the lived experiences of consumers who are willing to be involved. Where reviews do involve consumers, their contribution to the final result could be more clearly identified. More rigorous evaluations are needed to determine the best approach to achieving this. Trial registration Not applicable.

Health effects of indebtedness: a systematic review

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background In the aftermath of the global financial crisis, millions of households have been left with debts that they are unable to manage. Indebtedness may impair the wellbeing of those affected by it for years to come. This systematic review focuses on the long-term consequences of indebtedness on health. Methods The method used in the paper is a systematic review. First, bibliographic databases were searched for peer-reviewed articles. Second, the references and citations of the included articles were searched for additional articles. Results The results from our sample of 33 peer-reviewed studies demonstrate serious health effects related to indebtedness. Individuals with unmet loan payments had suicidal ideation and suffered from depression more often than those without such financial problems. Unpaid financial obligations were also related to poorer subjective health and health-related behaviour. Debt counselling and other programmes to mitigate debt-related stress are needed to alleviate the adverse effects of indebtedness on health. Conclusions The results demonstrate that indebtedness has serious effects on health. PMID:24885280

Effects of e-Learning and m-Learning on Nursing Care in a Continuing Education Context: An Overview of Mixed Method Systematic Reviews (Protocol).

PubMed

Rouleau, Geneviève; Gagnon, Marie-Pierre; Côté, José; Hudson, Emilie; Payne-Gagnon, Julie; Bouix-Picasso, Julien; Duboi, Carl-Ardy

2017-01-01

Continuing education is an imperative for professional nursing. e-Learning is one modality to support education and it has been extensively examined in a nursing academic context. An overview of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method systematic reviews were conducted to draw a broad picture of the effects of e-Learning and m-Learning used by registered nurses in a continuing education context.

Interpretive analysis of 85 systematic reviews suggests that narrative syntheses and meta‐analyses are incommensurate in argumentation

PubMed Central

O'Mara‐Eves, A.; Thomas, J.; Brunton, G.; Caird, J.; Petticrew, M.

2016-01-01

Using Toulmin's argumentation theory, we analysed the texts of systematic reviews in the area of workplace health promotion to explore differences in the modes of reasoning embedded in reports of narrative synthesis as compared with reports of meta‐analysis. We used framework synthesis, grounded theory and cross‐case analysis methods to analyse 85 systematic reviews addressing intervention effectiveness in workplace health promotion. Two core categories, or ‘modes of reasoning’, emerged to frame the contrast between narrative synthesis and meta‐analysis: practical–configurational reasoning in narrative synthesis (‘what is going on here? What picture emerges?’) and inferential–predictive reasoning in meta‐analysis (‘does it work, and how well? Will it work again?’). Modes of reasoning examined quality and consistency of the included evidence differently. Meta‐analyses clearly distinguished between warrant and claim, whereas narrative syntheses often presented joint warrant–claims. Narrative syntheses and meta‐analyses represent different modes of reasoning. Systematic reviewers are likely to be addressing research questions in different ways with each method. It is important to consider narrative synthesis in its own right as a method and to develop specific quality criteria and understandings of how it is carried out, not merely as a complement to, or second‐best option for, meta‐analysis. © 2016 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. PMID:27860329

Reducing the time-lag between onset of chest pain and seeking professional medical help: a theory-based review

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Background Research suggests that there are a number of factors which can be associated with delay in a patient seeking professional help following chest pain, including demographic and social factors. These factors may have an adverse impact on the efficacy of interventions which to date have had limited success in improving patient action times. Theory-based methods of review are becoming increasingly recognised as important additions to conventional systematic review methods. They can be useful to gain additional insights into the characteristics of effective interventions by uncovering complex underlying mechanisms. Methods This paper describes the further analysis of research papers identified in a conventional systematic review of published evidence. The aim of this work was to investigate the theoretical frameworks underpinning studies exploring the issue of why people having a heart attack delay seeking professional medical help. The study used standard review methods to identify papers meeting the inclusion criterion, and carried out a synthesis of data relating to theoretical underpinnings. Results Thirty six papers from the 53 in the original systematic review referred to a particular theoretical perspective, or contained data which related to theoretical assumptions. The most frequently mentioned theory was the self-regulatory model of illness behaviour. Papers reported the potential significance of aspects of this model including different coping mechanisms, strategies of denial and varying models of treatment seeking. Studies also drew attention to the potential role of belief systems, applied elements of attachment theory, and referred to models of maintaining integrity, ways of knowing, and the influence of gender. Conclusions The review highlights the need to examine an individual’s subjective experience of and response to health threats, and confirms the gap between knowledge and changed behaviour. Interventions face key challenges if they are to influence patient perceptions regarding seriousness of symptoms; varying processes of coping; and obstacles created by patient perceptions of their role and responsibilities. A theoretical approach to review of these papers provides additional insight into the assumptions underpinning interventions, and illuminates factors which may impact on their efficacy. The method thus offers a useful supplement to conventional systematic review methods. PMID:23388093

Methods to Evaluate the Effects of Internet-Based Digital Health Interventions for Citizens: Systematic Review of Reviews.

PubMed

Zanaboni, Paolo; Ngangue, Patrice; Mbemba, Gisele Irène Claudine; Schopf, Thomas Roger; Bergmo, Trine Strand; Gagnon, Marie-Pierre

2018-06-07

Digital health can empower citizens to manage their health and address health care system problems including poor access, uncoordinated care and increasing costs. Digital health interventions are typically complex interventions. Therefore, evaluations present methodological challenges. The objective of this study was to provide a systematic overview of the methods used to evaluate the effects of internet-based digital health interventions for citizens. Three research questions were addressed to explore methods regarding approaches (study design), effects and indicators. We conducted a systematic review of reviews of the methods used to measure the effects of internet-based digital health interventions for citizens. The protocol was developed a priori according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols and the Cochrane Collaboration methodology for overviews of reviews. Qualitative, mixed-method, and quantitative reviews published in English or French from January 2010 to October 2016 were included. We searched for published reviews in PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINHAL and Epistemonikos. We categorized the findings based on a thematic analysis of the reviews structured around study designs, indicators, types of interventions, effects and perspectives. A total of 20 unique reviews were included. The most common digital health interventions for citizens were patient portals and patients' access to electronic health records, covered by 10/20 (50%) and 6/20 (30%) reviews, respectively. Quantitative approaches to study design included observational study (15/20 reviews, 75%), randomized controlled trial (13/20 reviews, 65%), quasi-experimental design (9/20 reviews, 45%), and pre-post studies (6/20 reviews, 30%). Qualitative studies or mixed methods were reported in 13/20 (65%) reviews. Five main categories of effects were identified: (1) health and clinical outcomes, (2) psychological and behavioral outcomes, (3) health care utilization, (4) system adoption and use, and (5) system attributes. Health and clinical outcomes were measured with both general indicators and disease-specific indicators and reported in 11/20 (55%) reviews. Patient-provider communication and patient satisfaction were the most investigated psychological and behavioral outcomes, reported in 13/20 (65%) and 12/20 (60%) reviews, respectively. Evaluation of health care utilization was included in 8/20 (40%) reviews, most of which focused on the economic effects on the health care system. Although observational studies and surveys have provided evidence of benefits and satisfaction for patients, there is still little reliable evidence from randomized controlled trials of improved health outcomes. Future evaluations of digital health interventions for citizens should focus on specific populations or chronic conditions which are more likely to achieve clinically meaningful benefits and use high-quality approaches such as randomized controlled trials. Implementation research methods should also be considered. We identified a wide range of effects and indicators, most of which focused on patients as main end users. Implications for providers and the health system should also be included in evaluations or monitoring of digital health interventions. ©Paolo Zanaboni, Patrice Ngangue, Gisele Irène Claudine Mbemba, Thomas Roger Schopf, Trine Strand Bergmo, Marie-Pierre Gagnon. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 07.06.2018.

Technical Packages in Injury and Violence Prevention to Move Evidence Into Practice: Systematic Reviews and Beyond.

PubMed

Haegerich, Tamara M; David-Ferdon, Corinne; Noonan, Rita K; Manns, Brian J; Billie, Holly C

2016-09-07

Injury and violence prevention strategies have greater potential for impact when they are based on scientific evidence. Systematic reviews of the scientific evidence can contribute key information about which policies and programs might have the greatest impact when implemented. However, systematic reviews have limitations, such as lack of implementation guidance and contextual information, that can limit the application of knowledge. "Technical packages," developed by knowledge brokers such as the federal government, nonprofit agencies, and academic institutions, have the potential to be an efficient mechanism for making information from systematic reviews actionable. Technical packages provide information about specific evidence-based prevention strategies, along with the estimated costs and impacts, and include accompanying implementation and evaluation guidance to facilitate adoption, implementation, and performance measurement. We describe how systematic reviews can inform the development of technical packages for practitioners, provide examples of technical packages in injury and violence prevention, and explain how enhancing review methods and reporting could facilitate the use and applicability of scientific evidence. © The Author(s) 2016.

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 types of evidence. The updated JBI guidance will be useful for researchers wanting to synthesize evidence about economic questions, either as stand-alone reviews or part of comprehensive or mixed method evidence reviews. Although the updated methodology produced by the work of the working group has improved the JBI guidance for systematic reviews of economic evaluations, there are areas where further work is required. These include adjusting the critical appraisal tool to separate out questions addressing intervention cost and effectiveness measurement; providing more explicit guidance for assessing generalizability of findings; and offering a more robust method for evidence synthesis that facilitates achieving the more ambitious review objectives.

Non-Surgical Interventions for Adolescents with Idiopathic Scoliosis: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

PubMed Central

Płaszewski, Maciej; Bettany-Saltikov, Josette

2014-01-01

Background Non-surgical interventions for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis remain highly controversial. Despite the publication of numerous reviews no explicit methodological evaluation of papers labeled as, or having a layout of, a systematic review, addressing this subject matter, is available. Objectives Analysis and comparison of the content, methodology, and evidence-base from systematic reviews regarding non-surgical interventions for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. Design Systematic overview of systematic reviews. Methods Articles meeting the minimal criteria for a systematic review, regarding any non-surgical intervention for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, with any outcomes measured, were included. Multiple general and systematic review specific databases, guideline registries, reference lists and websites of institutions were searched. The AMSTAR tool was used to critically appraise the methodology, and the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine and the Joanna Briggs Institute’s hierarchies were applied to analyze the levels of evidence from included reviews. Results From 469 citations, twenty one papers were included for analysis. Five reviews assessed the effectiveness of scoliosis-specific exercise treatments, four assessed manual therapies, five evaluated bracing, four assessed different combinations of interventions, and one evaluated usual physical activity. Two reviews addressed the adverse effects of bracing. Two papers were high quality Cochrane reviews, Three were of moderate, and the remaining sixteen were of low or very low methodological quality. The level of evidence of these reviews ranged from 1 or 1+ to 4, and in some reviews, due to their low methodological quality and/or poor reporting, this could not be established. Conclusions Higher quality reviews indicate that generally there is insufficient evidence to make a judgment on whether non-surgical interventions in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis are effective. Papers labeled as systematic reviews need to be considered in terms of their methodological rigor; otherwise they may be mistakenly regarded as high quality sources of evidence. Protocol registry number CRD42013003538, PROSPERO PMID:25353954

Interpretive analysis of 85 systematic reviews suggests that narrative syntheses and meta-analyses are incommensurate in argumentation.

PubMed

Melendez-Torres, G J; O'Mara-Eves, A; Thomas, J; Brunton, G; Caird, J; Petticrew, M

2017-03-01

Using Toulmin's argumentation theory, we analysed the texts of systematic reviews in the area of workplace health promotion to explore differences in the modes of reasoning embedded in reports of narrative synthesis as compared with reports of meta-analysis. We used framework synthesis, grounded theory and cross-case analysis methods to analyse 85 systematic reviews addressing intervention effectiveness in workplace health promotion. Two core categories, or 'modes of reasoning', emerged to frame the contrast between narrative synthesis and meta-analysis: practical-configurational reasoning in narrative synthesis ('what is going on here? What picture emerges?') and inferential-predictive reasoning in meta-analysis ('does it work, and how well? Will it work again?'). Modes of reasoning examined quality and consistency of the included evidence differently. Meta-analyses clearly distinguished between warrant and claim, whereas narrative syntheses often presented joint warrant-claims. Narrative syntheses and meta-analyses represent different modes of reasoning. Systematic reviewers are likely to be addressing research questions in different ways with each method. It is important to consider narrative synthesis in its own right as a method and to develop specific quality criteria and understandings of how it is carried out, not merely as a complement to, or second-best option for, meta-analysis. © 2016 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. © 2016 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Overview of Systematic Reviews: Yoga as a Therapeutic Intervention for Adults with Acute and Chronic Health Conditions

PubMed Central

McCall, Marcy C.; Ward, Alison; Roberts, Nia W.; Heneghan, Carl

2013-01-01

Objectives. Overview the quality, direction, and characteristics of yoga interventions for treatment of acute and chronic health conditions in adult populations. Methods. We searched for systematic reviews in 10 online databases, bibliographic references, and hand-searches in yoga-related journals. Included reviews satisfy Oxman criteria and specify yoga as a primary intervention in one or more randomized controlled trials for treatment in adults. The AMSTAR tool and GRADE approach evaluated the methodological quality of reviews and quality of evidence. Results. We identified 2202 titles, of which 41 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and 26 systematic reviews satisfied inclusion criteria. Thirteen systematic reviews include quantitative data and six papers include meta-analysis. The quality of evidence is generally low. Sixteen different types of health conditions are included. Eleven reviews show tendency towards positive effects of yoga intervention, 15 reviews report unclear results, and no, reviews report adverse effects of yoga. Yoga appears most effective for reducing symptoms in anxiety, depression, and pain. Conclusion. Although the quality of systematic reviews is high, the quality of supporting evidence is low. Significant heterogeneity and variability in reporting interventions by type of yoga, settings, and population characteristics limit the generalizability of results. PMID:23762174

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.

Comparison between the standard and a new alternative format of the Summary-of-Findings tables in Cochrane review users: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

PubMed

Carrasco-Labra, Alonso; Brignardello-Petersen, Romina; Santesso, Nancy; Neumann, Ignacio; Mustafa, Reem A; Mbuagbaw, Lawrence; Ikobaltzeta, Itziar Etxeandia; De Stio, Catherine; McCullagh, Lauren J; Alonso-Coello, Pablo; Meerpohl, Joerg J; Vandvik, Per Olav; Brozek, Jan L; Akl, Elie A; Bossuyt, Patrick; Churchill, Rachel; Glenton, Claire; Rosenbaum, Sarah; Tugwell, Peter; Welch, Vivian; Guyatt, Gordon; Schünemann, Holger

2015-04-16

Systematic reviews represent one of the most important tools for knowledge translation but users often struggle with understanding and interpreting their results. GRADE Summary-of-Findings tables have been developed to display results of systematic reviews in a concise and transparent manner. The current format of the Summary-of-Findings tables for presenting risks and quality of evidence improves understanding and assists users with finding key information from the systematic review. However, it has been suggested that additional methods to present risks and display results in the Summary-of-Findings tables are needed. We will conduct a non-inferiority parallel-armed randomized controlled trial to determine whether an alternative format to present risks and display Summary-of-Findings tables is not inferior compared to the current standard format. We will measure participant understanding, accessibility of the information, satisfaction, and preference for both formats. We will invite systematic review users to participate (that is clinicians, guideline developers, and researchers). The data collection process will be undertaken using the online 'Survey Monkey' system. For the primary outcome understanding, non-inferiority of the alternative format (Table A) to the current standard format (Table C) of Summary-of-Findings tables will be claimed if the upper limit of a 1-sided 95% confidence interval (for the difference of proportion of participants answering correctly a given question) excluded a difference in favor of the current format of more than 10%. This study represents an effort to provide systematic reviewers with additional options to display review results using Summary-of-Findings tables. In this way, review authors will have a variety of methods to present risks and more flexibility to choose the most appropriate table features to display (that is optional columns, risks expressions, complementary methods to display continuous outcomes, and so on). NCT02022631 (21 December 2013).

Considering methodological options for reviews of theory: illustrated by a review of theories linking income and health

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Review of theory is an area of growing methodological advancement. Theoretical reviews are particularly useful where the literature is complex, multi-discipline, or contested. It has been suggested that adopting methods from systematic reviews may help address these challenges. However, the methodological approaches to reviews of theory, including the degree to which systematic review methods can be incorporated, have received little discussion in the literature. We recently employed systematic review methods in a review of theories about the causal relationship between income and health. Methods This article discusses some of the methodological issues we considered in developing the review and offers lessons learnt from our experiences. It examines the stages of a systematic review in relation to how they could be adapted for a review of theory. The issues arising and the approaches taken in the review of theories in income and health are considered, drawing on the approaches of other reviews of theory. Results Different approaches to searching were required, including electronic and manual searches, and electronic citation tracking to follow the development of theories. Determining inclusion criteria was an iterative process to ensure that inclusion criteria were specific enough to make the review practical and focused, but not so narrow that key literature was excluded. Involving subject specialists was valuable in the literature searches to ensure principal papers were identified and during the inductive approaches used in synthesis of theories to provide detailed understanding of how theories related to another. Reviews of theory are likely to involve iterations and inductive processes throughout, and some of the concepts and techniques that have been developed for qualitative evidence synthesis can be usefully translated to theoretical reviews of this kind. Conclusions It may be useful at the outset of a review of theory to consider whether the key aim of the review is to scope out theories relating to a particular issue; to conduct in-depth analysis of key theoretical works with the aim of developing new, overarching theories and interpretations; or to combine both these processes in the review. This can help decide the most appropriate methodological approach to take at particular stages of the review. PMID:25312937

Evaluating clinical librarian services: a systematic review.

PubMed

Brettle, Alison; Maden-Jenkins, Michelle; Anderson, Lucy; McNally, Rosalind; Pratchett, Tracey; Tancock, Jenny; Thornton, Debra; Webb, Anne

2011-03-01

  Previous systematic reviews have indicated limited evidence and poor quality evaluations of clinical librarian (CL) services. Rigorous evaluations should demonstrate the value of CL services, but guidance is needed before this can be achieved.   To undertake a systematic review which examines models of CL services, quality, methods and perspectives of clinical librarian service evaluations.   Systematic review methodology and synthesis of evidence, undertaken collaboratively by a group of 8 librarians to develop research and critical appraisal skills.   There are four clear models of clinical library service provision. Clinical librarians are effective in saving health professionals time, providing relevant, useful information and high quality services. Clinical librarians have a positive effect on clinical decision making by contributing to better informed decisions, diagnosis and choice of drug or therapy. The quality of CL studies is improving, but more work is needed on reducing bias and providing evidence of specific impacts on patient care. The Critical Incident Technique as part of a mixed method approach appears to offer a useful approach to demonstrating impact.   This systematic review provides practical guidance regarding the evaluation of CL services. It also provides updated evidence regarding the effectiveness and impact of CL services. The approach used was successful in developing research and critical appraisal skills in a group of librarians. © 2010 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2010 Health Libraries Group.

Core Professionalism Education in Surgery: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Sarıoğlu Büke, Akile; Karabilgin Öztürkçü, Özlem Sürel; Yılmaz, Yusuf; Sayek, İskender

2018-03-15

Professionalism education is one of the major elements of surgical residency education. To evaluate the studies on core professionalism education programs in surgical professionalism education. Systematic review. This systematic literature review was performed to analyze core professionalism programs for surgical residency education published in English with at least three of the following features: program developmental model/instructional design method, aims and competencies, methods of teaching, methods of assessment, and program evaluation model or method. A total of 27083 articles were retrieved using EBSCOHOST, PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, and manual search. Eight articles met the selection criteria. The instructional design method was presented in only one article, which described the Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation model. Six articles were based on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education criterion, although there was significant variability in content. The most common teaching method was role modeling with scenario- and case-based learning. A wide range of assessment methods for evaluating professionalism education were reported. The Kirkpatrick model was reported in one article as a method for program evaluation. It is suggested that for a core surgical professionalism education program, developmental/instructional design model, aims and competencies, content, teaching methods, assessment methods, and program evaluation methods/models should be well defined, and the content should be comparable.

Agriculture, food, and nutrition interventions that facilitate sustainable food production and impact health: an overview of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Haby, Michelle M; Chapman, Evelina; Clark, Rachel; Galvão, Luiz A C

2016-08-01

Objectives To identify the agriculture, food, and nutrition security interventions that facilitate sustainable food production and have a positive impact on health. Methods Systematic review methods were used to synthesize evidence from multiple systematic reviews and economic evaluations through a comprehensive search of 17 databases and 10 websites. The search employed a pre-defined protocol with clear inclusion criteria. Both grey and peer-reviewed literature published in English, Spanish, and Portuguese between 1 January 1997 and November 2013 were included. To classify as "sustainable," interventions needed to aim to positively impact at least two dimensions of the integrated framework for sustainable development and include measures of health impact. Results Fifteen systematic reviews and seven economic evaluations met the inclusion criteria. All interventions had some impact on health or on risk factors for health outcomes, except those related to genetically modified foods. Impact on health inequalities was rarely measured. All interventions with economic evaluations were very cost-effective, had cost savings, or net benefits. In addition to impacting health (inclusive social development), all interventions had the potential to impact on inclusive economic development, and some, on environmental sustainability, though these effects were rarely assessed. Conclusions What is needed now is careful implementation of interventions with expected positive health impacts but with concurrent, rigorous evaluation. Possible impact on health inequalities needs to be considered and measured by future primary studies and systematic reviews, as does impact of interventions on all dimensions of sustainable development.

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 potential avenues for future investigation. PMID:22942232

SystEmatic review and meta-aNAlysis of infanT and young child feeding Practices (ENAT-P) in Ethiopia: protocol

PubMed Central

Islam, Md. Atiqul; Sharew, Nigussie Tadesse; Birhanu, Mulugeta Molla; Tegegne, Balewgizie Sileshi

2017-01-01

Introduction Infant and young child feeding (IYCF) is the cornerstone of infant and child survival, healthy growth and development, healthy future generations and national development. In spite of the importance of optimal nutrition in low- and middle-income countries, there has been no review conducted in Ethiopia. Thus, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to estimate the national coverage and identify the associated factors of IYCF practices in Ethiopia. Methods PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, CINHAL, EBSCO, Web of Science and WHO Global Health Library databases will be searched for all available publications from 1 January 2000 to 30 September 2017. All published studies on the timely initiation of breast feeding, exclusive breast feeding and timely initiation of complementary feeding practice in Ethiopia will be screened, selected and reviewed. Bibliographies of identified articles and grey literature will be hand-searched as well. Heterogeneity of studies will be quantified using Higgins’s method where I2 statistic >80% indicates substantial heterogeneity. Funnel plots and Egger’s regression test will be used to assess potential publication bias. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) will be used to assess the quality of evidence and risk of bias. Meta-analysis and meta-regression will be carried out to estimate the pooled national prevalence rate and an OR of each associated factor of IYCF practices. Narrative synthesis will be performed if meta-analysis is not feasible due to the substantial heterogeneity of studies. Ethics and dissemination Ethical clearance is not required for this study because primary data will not be collected. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at an (inter)national research symposium. Systematic review registration This systematic review and meta-analysis has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42017056768. PMID:28775196

Producing Cochrane systematic reviews-a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement.

PubMed

Turner, Tari; Green, Sally; Tovey, David; McDonald, Steve; Soares-Weiser, Karla; Pestridge, Charlotte; Elliott, Julian

2017-08-01

Producing high-quality, relevant systematic reviews and keeping them up to date is challenging. Cochrane is a leading provider of systematic reviews in health. For Cochrane to continue to contribute to improvements in heath, Cochrane Reviews must be rigorous, reliable and up to date. We aimed to explore existing models of Cochrane Review production and emerging opportunities to improve the efficiency and sustainability of these processes. To inform discussions about how to best achieve this, we conducted 26 interviews and an online survey with 106 respondents. Respondents highlighted the importance and challenge of creating reliable, timely systematic reviews. They described the challenges and opportunities presented by current production models, and they shared what they are doing to improve review production. They particularly highlighted significant challenges with increasing complexity of review methods; difficulty keeping authors on board and on track; and the length of time required to complete the process. Strong themes emerged about the roles of authors and Review Groups, the central actors in the review production process. The results suggest that improvements to Cochrane's systematic review production models could come from improving clarity of roles and expectations, ensuring continuity and consistency of input, enabling active management of the review process, centralising some review production steps; breaking reviews into smaller "chunks", and improving approaches to building capacity of and sharing information between authors and Review Groups. Respondents noted the important role new technologies have to play in enabling these improvements. The findings of this study will inform the development of new Cochrane Review production models and may provide valuable data for other systematic review producers as they consider how best to produce rigorous, reliable, up-to-date reviews.

Physical rehabilitation interventions for adult patients with critical illness across the continuum of recovery: an overview of systematic reviews protocol.

PubMed

Connolly, Bronwen; O'Neill, Brenda; Salisbury, Lisa; McDowell, Kathryn; Blackwood, Bronagh

2015-09-29

Patients admitted to the intensive care unit with critical illness often experience significant physical impairments, which typically persist for many years following resolution of the original illness. Physical rehabilitation interventions that enhance restoration of physical function have been evaluated across the continuum of recovery following critical illness including within the intensive care unit, following discharge to the ward and beyond hospital discharge. Multiple systematic reviews have been published appraising the expanding evidence investigating these physical rehabilitation interventions, although there appears to be variability in review methodology and quality. We aim to conduct an overview of existing systematic reviews of physical rehabilitation interventions for adult intensive care patients across the continuum of recovery. This protocol has been developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol (PRISMA-P) guidelines. We will search the Cochrane Systematic Review Database, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases. We will include systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials of adult patients, admitted to the intensive care unit and who have received physical rehabilitation interventions at any time point during their recovery. Data extraction will include systematic review aims and rationale, study types, populations, interventions, comparators, outcomes and quality appraisal method. Primary outcomes of interest will focus on findings reflecting recovery of physical function. Quality of reporting and methodological quality will be appraised using the PRISMA checklist and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews tool. We anticipate the findings from this novel overview of systematic reviews will contribute to the synthesis and interpretation of existing evidence regarding physical rehabilitation interventions and physical recovery in post-critical illness patients across the continuum of recovery. PROSPERO CRD42015001068.

Considering methodological options for reviews of theory: illustrated by a review of theories linking income and health.

PubMed

Campbell, Mhairi; Egan, Matt; Lorenc, Theo; Bond, Lyndal; Popham, Frank; Fenton, Candida; Benzeval, Michaela

2014-10-13

Review of theory is an area of growing methodological advancement. Theoretical reviews are particularly useful where the literature is complex, multi-discipline, or contested. It has been suggested that adopting methods from systematic reviews may help address these challenges. However, the methodological approaches to reviews of theory, including the degree to which systematic review methods can be incorporated, have received little discussion in the literature. We recently employed systematic review methods in a review of theories about the causal relationship between income and health. This article discusses some of the methodological issues we considered in developing the review and offers lessons learnt from our experiences. It examines the stages of a systematic review in relation to how they could be adapted for a review of theory. The issues arising and the approaches taken in the review of theories in income and health are considered, drawing on the approaches of other reviews of theory. Different approaches to searching were required, including electronic and manual searches, and electronic citation tracking to follow the development of theories. Determining inclusion criteria was an iterative process to ensure that inclusion criteria were specific enough to make the review practical and focused, but not so narrow that key literature was excluded. Involving subject specialists was valuable in the literature searches to ensure principal papers were identified and during the inductive approaches used in synthesis of theories to provide detailed understanding of how theories related to another. Reviews of theory are likely to involve iterations and inductive processes throughout, and some of the concepts and techniques that have been developed for qualitative evidence synthesis can be usefully translated to theoretical reviews of this kind. It may be useful at the outset of a review of theory to consider whether the key aim of the review is to scope out theories relating to a particular issue; to conduct in-depth analysis of key theoretical works with the aim of developing new, overarching theories and interpretations; or to combine both these processes in the review. This can help decide the most appropriate methodological approach to take at particular stages of the review.

Methods for the evaluation of hospital cooperation activities (Systematic review protocol).

PubMed

Rotter, Thomas; Popa, Daniela; Riley, Beatrice; Ellermann, Tim; Ryll, Ulrike; Burazeri, Genc; Daemen, Piet; Peeters, Guy; Brand, Helmut

2012-02-10

Hospital partnerships, mergers and cooperatives are arrangements frequently seen as a means of improving health service delivery. Many of the assumptions used in planning hospital cooperatives are not stated clearly and are often based on limited or poor scientific evidence. This is a protocol for a systematic review, following the Cochrane EPOC methodology. The review aims to document, catalogue and synthesize the existing literature on the reported methods for the evaluation of hospital cooperation activities as well as methods of hospital cooperation. We will search the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and bibliographic databases including PubMed (via NLM), Web of Science, NHS EED, Business Source Premier (via EBSCO) and Global Health for publications that report on methods for evaluating hospital cooperatives, strategic partnerships, mergers, alliances, networks and related activities and methods used for such partnerships. The method proposed by the Cochrane EPOC group regarding randomized study designs, controlled clinical trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series will be followed. In addition, we will also include cohort, case-control studies, and relevant non-comparative publications such as case reports. We will categorize and analyze the review findings according to the study design employed, the study quality (low versus high quality studies) and the method reported in the primary studies. We will present the results of studies in tabular form. Overall, the systematic review aims to identify, assess and synthesize the evidence to underpin hospital cooperation activities as defined in this protocol. As a result, the review will provide an evidence base for partnerships, alliances or other fields of cooperation in a hospital setting. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42011001579.

Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations

PubMed Central

Greenhalgh, Trisha; Robert, Glenn; Macfarlane, Fraser; Bate, Paul; Kyriakidou, Olivia

2004-01-01

This article summarizes an extensive literature review addressing the question, How can we spread and sustain innovations in health service delivery and organization? It considers both content (defining and measuring the diffusion of innovation in organizations) and process (reviewing the literature in a systematic and reproducible way). This article discusses (1) a parsimonious and evidence-based model for considering the diffusion of innovations in health service organizations, (2) clear knowledge gaps where further research should be focused, and (3) a robust and transferable methodology for systematically reviewing health service policy and management. Both the model and the method should be tested more widely in a range of contexts. PMID:15595944

Aromatherapy for managing menopausal symptoms

PubMed Central

Choi, Jiae; Lee, Hye Won; Lee, Ju Ah; Lim, Hyun-Ja; Lee, Myeong Soo

2018-01-01

Abstract Background: Aromatherapy is often used as a complementary therapy for women's health. This systematic review aims to evaluate the therapeutic effects of aromatherapy as a management for menopausal symptoms. Methods: Eleven electronic databases will be searched from inception to February 2018. Randomized controlled trials that evaluated any type of aromatherapy against any type of control in individuals with menopausal symptoms will be eligible. The methodological quality will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Two authors will independently assess each study for eligibility and risk of bias and to extract data. Results: This study will provide a high quality synthesis of current evidence of aromatherapy for menopausal symptoms measured with Menopause Rating Scale, the Kupperman Index, the Greene Climacteric Scale, or other validated questionnaires. Conclusions: The conclusion of our systematic review will provide evidence to judge whether aromatherapy is an effective intervention for patient with menopausal women. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval will not be required, given that this protocol is for a systematic review. The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The review will also be disseminated electronically and in print. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42017079191. PMID:29419673

Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions.

PubMed

Page, Matthew J; McKenzie, Joanne E; Kirkham, Jamie; Dwan, Kerry; Kramer, Sharon; Green, Sally; Forbes, Andrew

2014-10-01

Systematic reviews may be compromised by selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses. Selective inclusion occurs when there are multiple effect estimates in a trial report that could be included in a particular meta-analysis (e.g. from multiple measurement scales and time points) and the choice of effect estimate to include in the meta-analysis is based on the results (e.g. statistical significance, magnitude or direction of effect). Selective reporting occurs when the reporting of a subset of outcomes and analyses in the systematic review is based on the results (e.g. a protocol-defined outcome is omitted from the published systematic review). To summarise the characteristics and synthesise the results of empirical studies that have investigated the prevalence of selective inclusion or reporting in systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), investigated the factors (e.g. statistical significance or direction of effect) associated with the prevalence and quantified the bias. We searched the Cochrane Methodology Register (to July 2012), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid PsycINFO and ISI Web of Science (each up to May 2013), and the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Effective Healthcare Program's Scientific Resource Center (SRC) Methods Library (to June 2013). We also searched the abstract books of the 2011 and 2012 Cochrane Colloquia and the article alerts for methodological work in research synthesis published from 2009 to 2011 and compiled in Research Synthesis Methods. We included both published and unpublished empirical studies that investigated the prevalence and factors associated with selective inclusion or reporting, or both, in systematic reviews of RCTs of healthcare interventions. We included empirical studies assessing any type of selective inclusion or reporting, such as investigations of how frequently RCT outcome data is selectively included in systematic reviews based on the results, outcomes and analyses are discrepant between protocol and published review or non-significant outcomes are partially reported in the full text or summary within systematic reviews. Two review authors independently selected empirical studies for inclusion, extracted the data and performed a risk of bias assessment. A third review author resolved any disagreements about inclusion or exclusion of empirical studies, data extraction and risk of bias. We contacted authors of included studies for additional unpublished data. Primary outcomes included overall prevalence of selective inclusion or reporting, association between selective inclusion or reporting and the statistical significance of the effect estimate, and association between selective inclusion or reporting and the direction of the effect estimate. We combined prevalence estimates and risk ratios (RRs) using a random-effects meta-analysis model. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. No studies had investigated selective inclusion of results in systematic reviews, or discrepancies in outcomes and analyses between systematic review registry entries and published systematic reviews. Based on a meta-analysis of four studies (including 485 Cochrane Reviews), 38% (95% confidence interval (CI) 23% to 54%) of systematic reviews added, omitted, upgraded or downgraded at least one outcome between the protocol and published systematic review. The association between statistical significance and discrepant outcome reporting between protocol and published systematic review was uncertain. The meta-analytic estimate suggested an increased risk of adding or upgrading (i.e. changing a secondary outcome to primary) when the outcome was statistically significant, although the 95% CI included no association and a decreased risk as plausible estimates (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.85; two studies, n = 552 meta-analyses). Also, the meta-analytic estimate suggested an increased risk of downgrading (i.e. changing a primary outcome to secondary) when the outcome was statistically significant, although the 95% CI included no association and a decreased risk as plausible estimates (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.62; two studies, n = 484 meta-analyses). None of the included studies had investigated whether the association between statistical significance and adding, upgrading or downgrading of outcomes was modified by the type of comparison, direction of effect or type of outcome; or whether there is an association between direction of the effect estimate and discrepant outcome reporting.Several secondary outcomes were reported in the included studies. Two studies found that reasons for discrepant outcome reporting were infrequently reported in published systematic reviews (6% in one study and 22% in the other). One study (including 62 Cochrane Reviews) found that 32% (95% CI 21% to 45%) of systematic reviews did not report all primary outcomes in the abstract. Another study (including 64 Cochrane and 118 non-Cochrane reviews) found that statistically significant primary outcomes were more likely to be completely reported in the systematic review abstract than non-significant primary outcomes (RR 2.66, 95% CI 1.81 to 3.90). None of the studies included systematic reviews published after 2009 when reporting standards for systematic reviews (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement, and Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR)) were disseminated, so the results might not be generalisable to more recent systematic reviews. Discrepant outcome reporting between the protocol and published systematic review is fairly common, although the association between statistical significance and discrepant outcome reporting is uncertain. Complete reporting of outcomes in systematic review abstracts is associated with statistical significance of the results for those outcomes. Systematic review outcomes and analysis plans should be specified prior to seeing the results of included studies to minimise post-hoc decisions that may be based on the observed results. Modifications that occur once the review has commenced, along with their justification, should be clearly reported. Effect estimates and CIs should be reported for all systematic review outcomes regardless of the results. The lack of research on selective inclusion of results in systematic reviews needs to be addressed and studies that avoid the methodological weaknesses of existing research are also needed.

School-Based Education Programs for the Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse: A Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Walsh, Kerryann; Zwi, Karen; Woolfenden, Susan; Shlonsky, Aron

2018-01-01

Objective: To assess evidence of the effectiveness of school-based education programs for the prevention of child sexual abuse (CSA). The programs deliver information about CSA and strategies to help children avoid it and encourage help seeking. Methods: Systematic review including meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cluster…

Young Children and Tablets: A Systematic Review of Effects on Learning and Development

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Herodotou, C.

2018-01-01

Mobile applications are popular among young children, yet there is a dearth of studies examining their impact on learning and development. A systematic review identified 19 studies reporting learning effects on children 2 to 5 years old. The number of children participating in experimental, quasi-experimental, or mixed-method studies was 862 and…

Systematic Review of Kinship Care Effects on Safety, Permanency, and Well-Being Outcomes

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Winokur, Marc A.; Holtan, Amy; Batchelder, Keri E.

2018-01-01

Objective: Children in out-of-home placements typically display more educational, behavioral, and psychological problems than do their peers. This systematic review evaluated the effect of kinship care placement compared to foster care placement on the safety, permanency, and well-being of children removed from the home for maltreatment. Methods:…

Could Participant-Produced Photography Augment Therapeutic Interventions for People with Intellectual Disabilities? A Systematic Review of the Available Evidence

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Boulton, Natalie E.; Williams, Jonathan; Jones, Robert S. P.

2018-01-01

Background: People with intellectual disabilities are entitled to equitable access to psychological support. Traditional therapeutic approaches often rely on a person's ability to verbally articulate a description of their life, which can be particularly difficult for emotionally salient information. Methods: A systematic literature review was…

Mental Health among Children and Young Adults with Visual Impairments: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Augestad, Liv Berit

2017-01-01

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to summarize current scientific knowledge relating to the occurrence of mood disorders among children with visual impairments. Methods: A systematic review was conducted of articles published between January1998 and July 2016, inclusive. A total of 17 publications met the inclusion criteria, of which 15…

A Systematic Review of State Vocational Rehabilitation Agency-Based Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Boeltzig-Brown, Heike; Fleming, Allison R.; Heyman, Miriam; Gauthier, Martha; Cully, Julisa; Foley, Susan M.

2017-01-01

Purpose: To conduct a systematic review (SR) of 550 studies produced between 1970 and 2008 that focus on programs and/or services provided by state vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies believed to impact client and/or program outcomes. Method: Authors used a 5-step SR protocol to evaluate and summarize study content and outcomes, study design,…

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Acceptability and Effectiveness of University Smoke-Free Policies

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Lupton, Joshua R.; Townsend, Joy L.

2015-01-01

Objective: Systematically review studies of support for, and effectiveness of, university campuses' smoke-free policies. Participants/Methods: A search was carried out for studies in English related to campus smoking bans through June 2013. Eligible studies had outcomes for student or faculty attitudes, or measures of smoking prevalence or…

Voice-Related Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: A Systematic Review of Instrument Development and Validation

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Francis, David O.; Daniero, James J.; Hovis, Kristen L.; Sathe, Nila; Jacobson, Barbara; Penson, David F.; Feurer, Irene D.; McPheeters, Melissa L.

2017-01-01

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive systematic review of the literature on voice-related patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in adults and to evaluate each instrument for the presence of important measurement properties. Method: MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Health…

Measurement of Habitual Physical Activity Performance in Adolescents with Cerebral Palsy: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Clanchy, Kelly M.; Tweedy, Sean M.; Boyd, Roslyn

2011-01-01

Aim: This systematic review compares the validity, reliability, and clinical use of habitual physical activity (HPA) performance measures in adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). Method: Measures of HPA across Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) levels I-V for adolescents (10-18y) with CP were included if at least 60% of items…

Enabling Self-Directed Computer Use for Individuals with Cerebral Palsy: A Systematic Review of Assistive Devices and Technologies

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Davies, T. Claire; Mudge, Suzie; Ameratunga, Shanthi; Stott, N. Susan

2010-01-01

Aim: The purpose of this study was to systematically review published evidence on the development, use, and effectiveness of devices and technologies that enable or enhance self-directed computer access by individuals with cerebral palsy (CP). Methods: Nine electronic databases were searched using keywords "computer", "software", "spastic",…

Community Participation of People with an Intellectual Disability: A Review of Empirical Findings

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Verdonschot, M. M. L.; de Witte, L. P.; Reichrath, E.; Buntinx, W. H. E.; Curfs, L. M. G.

2009-01-01

Study design: A systematic review of the literature. Objectives: To investigate community participation of persons with an intellectual disability (ID) as reported in empirical research studies. Method: A systematic literature search was conducted for the period of 1996-2006 on PubMed, CINAHL and PSYCINFO. Search terms were derived from the…

The Effectiveness of Antidepressant Medication in the Management of Behaviour Problems in Adults with Intellectual Disabilities: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Sohanpal, S. K.; Deb, S.; Thomas, C.; Soni, R.; Lenotre, L.; Unwin, G.

2007-01-01

Background: A comprehensive systematic review was performed to establish the current evidence base regarding the effectiveness of antidepressant medication for the management of behaviour problems in adults with intellectual disabilities. Method: An electronic search of PsycInfo, Embase, Medline and Cinahl databases was conducted spanning the time…

Interventions to Reduce Distress in Adult Victims of Rape and Sexual Violence: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Regehr, Cheryl; Alaggia, Ramona; Dennis, Jane; Pitts, Annabel; Saini, Michael

2013-01-01

Objectives: This article presents a systematic evaluation of the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing distress in adult victims of rape and sexual violence. Method: Studies were eligible for the review if the assignment of study participants to experimental or control groups was by random allocation or parallel cohort design. Results:…

Mixed methods systematic review exploring mentorship outcomes in nursing academia.

PubMed

Nowell, Lorelli; Norris, Jill M; Mrklas, Kelly; White, Deborah E

2017-03-01

The aim of this study was to report on a mixed methods systematic review that critically examines the evidence for mentorship in nursing academia. Nursing education institutions globally have issued calls for mentorship. There is emerging evidence to support the value of mentorship in other disciplines, but the extant state of the evidence in nursing academia is not known. A comprehensive review of the evidence is required. A mixed methods systematic review. Five databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, PsycINFO) were searched using an a priori search strategy from inception to 2 November 2015 to identify quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies. Grey literature searches were also conducted in electronic databases (ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Index to Theses) and mentorship conference proceedings and by hand searching the reference lists of eligible studies. Study quality was assessed prior to inclusion using standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute. A convergent qualitative synthesis design was used where results from qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies were transformed into qualitative findings. Mentorship outcomes were mapped to a theory-informed framework. Thirty-four studies were included in this review, from the 3001 records initially retrieved. In general, mentorship had a positive impact on behavioural, career, attitudinal, relational and motivational outcomes; however, the methodological quality of studies was weak. This review can inform the objectives of mentorship interventions and contribute to a more rigorous approach to studies that assess mentorship outcomes. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

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

Lean management in health care: definition, concepts, methodology and effects reported (systematic review protocol)

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Lean is a set of operating philosophies and methods that help create a maximum value for patients by reducing waste and waits. It emphasizes the consideration of the customer’s needs, employee involvement and continuous improvement. Research on the application and implementation of lean principles in health care has been limited. Methods This is a protocol for a systematic review, following the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) methodology. The review aims to document, catalogue and synthesize the existing literature on the effects of lean implementation in health care settings especially the potential effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. We have developed a Medline keyword search strategy, and this focused strategy will be translated into other databases. All search strategies will be provided in the review. The method proposed by the Cochrane EPOC group regarding randomized study designs, non-randomised controlled trials controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series will be followed. In addition, we will also include cohort, case–control studies, and relevant non-comparative publications such as case reports. We will categorize and analyse the review findings according to the study design employed, the study quality (low- versus high-quality studies) and the reported types of implementation in the primary studies. We will present the results of studies in a tabular form. Discussion Overall, the systematic review aims to identify, assess and synthesize the evidence to underpin the implementation of lean activities in health care settings as defined in this protocol. As a result, the review will provide an evidence base for the effectiveness of lean and implementation methodologies reported in health care. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42014008853 PMID:25238974

Qualitative Evaluation Methods in Ethics Education: A Systematic Review and Analysis of Best Practices.

PubMed

Watts, Logan L; Todd, E Michelle; Mulhearn, Tyler J; Medeiros, Kelsey E; Mumford, Michael D; Connelly, Shane

2017-01-01

Although qualitative research offers some unique advantages over quantitative research, qualitative methods are rarely employed in the evaluation of ethics education programs and are often criticized for a lack of rigor. This systematic review investigated the use of qualitative methods in studies of ethics education. Following a review of the literature in which 24 studies were identified, each study was coded based on 16 best practices characteristics in qualitative research. General thematic analysis and grounded theory were found to be the dominant approaches used. Researchers are effectively executing a number of best practices, such as using direct data sources, structured data collection instruments, non-leading questioning, and expert raters. However, other best practices were rarely present in the courses reviewed, such as collecting data using multiple sources, methods, raters, and timepoints, evaluating reliability, and employing triangulation analyses to assess convergence. Recommendations are presented for improving future qualitative research studies in ethics education.

Supplementary searches of PubMed to improve currency of MEDLINE and MEDLINE In-Process searches via Ovid

PubMed Central

Duffy, Steven; de Kock, Shelley; Misso, Kate; Noake, Caro; Ross, Janine; Stirk, Lisa

2016-01-01

Objective The research investigated whether conducting a supplementary search of PubMed in addition to the main MEDLINE (Ovid) search for a systematic review is worthwhile and to ascertain whether this PubMed search can be conducted quickly and if it retrieves unique, recently published, and ahead-of-print studies that are subsequently considered for inclusion in the final systematic review. Methods Searches of PubMed were conducted after MEDLINE (Ovid) and MEDLINE In-Process (Ovid) searches had been completed for seven recent reviews. The searches were limited to records not in MEDLINE or MEDLINE In-Process (Ovid). Results Additional unique records were identified for all of the investigated reviews. Search strategies were adapted quickly to run in PubMed, and reviewer screening of the results was not time consuming. For each of the investigated reviews, studies were ordered for full screening; in six cases, studies retrieved from the supplementary PubMed searches were included in the final systematic review. Conclusion Supplementary searching of PubMed for studies unavailable elsewhere is worthwhile and improves the currency of the systematic reviews. PMID:27822154

Effectiveness of acupuncture for cancer pain: protocol for an umbrella review and meta-analyses of controlled trials

PubMed Central

He, Yihan; Liu, Yihong; May, Brian H; Zhang, Anthony Lin; Zhang, Haibo; Lu, ChuanJian; Yang, Lihong; Guo, Xinfeng; Xue, Charlie Changli

2017-01-01

Introduction The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for adult cancer pain indicate that acupuncture and related therapies may be valuable additions to pharmacological interventions for pain management. Of the systematic reviews related to this topic, some concluded that acupuncture was promising for alleviating cancer pain, while others argued that the evidence was insufficient to support its effectiveness. Methods and analysis This review will consist of three components: (1) synthesis of findings from existing systematic reviews; (2) updated meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials and (3) analyses of results of other types of clinical studies. We will search six English and four Chinese biomedical databases, dissertations and grey literature to identify systematic reviews and primary clinical studies. Two reviewers will screen results of the literature searches independently to identify included reviews and studies. Data from included articles will be abstracted for assessment, analysis and summary. Two assessors will appraise the quality of systematic reviews using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews; assess the randomised controlled trials using the Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias tool and other types of studies according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We will use ‘summary of evidence’ tables to present evidence from existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Using the primary clinical studies, we will conduct meta-analysis for each outcome, by grouping studies based on the type of acupuncture, the comparator and the specific type of pain. Sensitivity analyses are planned according to clinical factors, acupuncture method, methodological characteristics and presence of statistical heterogeneity as applicable. For the non-randomised studies, we will tabulate the characteristics, outcome measures and the reported results of each study. Consistencies and inconsistencies in evidence will be investigated and discussed. Finally, we will use the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to evaluate the quality of the overall evidence. Ethics and dissemination There are no ethical considerations associated with this review. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals or conference presentations. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017064113. PMID:29229658

Training practitioners in preparing systematic reviews: a cross-sectional survey of participants in the Australasian Cochrane Centre training program

PubMed Central

Piehl, Janet H; Green, Sally; Silagy, Chris

2002-01-01

Background Although systematic reviews of health care interventions are an invaluable tool for health care providers and researchers, many potential authors never publish reviews. This study attempts to determine why some people with interest in performing systematic reviews do not subsequently publish a review; and what steps could possibly increase review completion. Methods Cross-sectional survey by email and facsimile of the 179 participants in Australasian Cochrane Centre training events between 1998 and 2000. Results Ninety-two participants responded to the survey (51 percent). Response rate of deliverable surveys was 82 percent (92/112). The remainder of the participants had invalid or no contact information on file. More than 75 percent of respondents felt that the current workshops met their needs for training. The most critical barriers to completion of a Cochrane review were: lack of time (80 percent), lack of financial support (36 percent), methodological problems (23 percent) and problems with group dynamics (10 percent). Conclusions Strategies to protect reviewer time and increase the efficiency of the review process may increase the numbers of trained reviewers completing a systematic review. PMID:12057022

Effects of complex interventions in ‘skin cancer prevention and treatment’: protocol for a mixed-method systematic review with qualitative comparative analysis

PubMed Central

Breitbart, Eckhard; Köberlein-Neu, Juliane

2017-01-01

Introduction Occurring from ultraviolet radiation combined with impairing ozone levels, uncritical sun exposure and use of tanning beds an increasing number of people are affected by different types of skin cancer. But preventive interventions like skin cancer screening are still missing the evidence for effectiveness and therefore are criticised. Fundamental for an appropriate course of action is to approach the defined parameters as measures for effectiveness critically. A prerequisite should be the critical application of used parameter that are defined as measures for effectiveness. This research seeks to establish, through the available literature, the effects and conditions that prove the effectiveness of prevention strategies in skin cancer. Method and analysis A mixed-method approach is employed to combine quantitative to qualitative methods and answer what effects can display effectiveness considering time horizon, perspective and organisational level and what are essential and sufficient conditions to prove effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in skin cancer prevention strategies. A systematic review will be performed to spot studies from any design and assess the data quantitatively and qualitatively. Included studies from each key question will be summarised by characteristics like population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, study design, endpoints, effect estimator and so on. Beside statistical relevancies for a systematic review the qualitative method of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) will be performed. The estimated outcomes from this review and QCA are the accomplishment and absence of effects that are appropriate for application in effectiveness assessments and further cost-effectiveness assessment. Ethics and dissemination Formal ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. Trial registration number International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews number CRD42017053859. PMID:28877950

Post-trial follow-up methodology in large randomized controlled trials: a systematic review protocol.

PubMed

Llewellyn-Bennett, Rebecca; Bowman, Louise; Bulbulia, Richard

2016-12-15

Clinical trials typically have a relatively short follow-up period, and may both underestimate potential benefits of treatments investigated, and fail to detect hazards, which can take much longer to emerge. Prolonged follow-up of trial participants after the end of the scheduled trial period can provide important information on both efficacy and safety outcomes. This protocol describes a systematic review to qualitatively compare methods of post-trial follow-up used in large randomized controlled trials. A systematic search of electronic databases and clinical trial registries will use a predefined search strategy. All large (more than 1000 adult participants) randomized controlled trials will be evaluated. Two reviewers will screen and extract data according to this protocol with the aim of 95% concordance of papers checked and discrepancies will be resolved by a third reviewer. Trial methods, participant retention rates and prevalence of missing data will be recorded and compared. The potential for bias will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (applied to the methods used during the in-trial period) with the aim of investigating whether the quality of the post-trial follow-up methodology might be predicted by the quality of the methods used for the original trial. Post-trial follow-up can provide valuable information about the long-term benefits and hazards of medical interventions. However, it can be logistically challenging and costly. The aim of this systematic review is to describe how trial participants have been followed-up post-trial in order to inform future post-trial follow-up designs. Not applicable for PROSPERO registration.

The effectiveness of concept mapping on development of critical thinking in nursing education: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PubMed

Yue, Meng; Zhang, Meng; Zhang, Chunmei; Jin, Changde

2017-05-01

As an essential skill in daily clinical nursing practice, critical thinking ability has been an important objective in nursing education. Concept mapping enables nursing students connect new information to existing knowledge and integrates interdisciplinary knowledge. However, there is a lack of evidence related to critical thinking ability and concept mapping in nursing education. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effect of concept mapping in developing critical thinking in nursing education. This systematic review was reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). A search was conducted in PubMed, Web of science, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). Randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing concept mapping and traditional teaching method were retrieved. Data were collected by two reviewers according to the data extraction tables. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed by other two reviewers. The results of meta-analysis were presented using mean difference (MD). Thirteen trials were summarized in the systematic review and eleven trials were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled effect size showed that, comparing with traditional methods, concept mapping could improve subjects' critical thinking ability measured by California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI), California Critical Thinking Skill Test (CCTST) and Critical Thinking Scale (CTS). The subgroup analyses showed that concept mapping improved the score of all subscales. The result of this review indicated that concept mapping could affect the critical thinking affective dispositions and critical thinking cognitive skills. Further high quality research using uniform evaluation is required. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Ethics and Community Involvement in Syntheses Concerning American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian Health: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Around Him, Deana M.

2014-01-01

Background The objective of the research was to review reporting of ethical concerns and community involvement in peer-reviewed systematic reviews or meta-analyses concerning American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian (AI/AN/NH) health. Methods Text words and indexed vocabulary terms were used to query PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the Native Health Database for systematic reviews or meta-analyses concerning AI/AN/NH health published in peer-reviewed journals, followed by a search through reference lists. Each article was abstracted by two independent reviewers; results were discussed until consensus was reached. Results We identified 107 papers published from 1986–2012 that were primarily about AI/AN/NH health or presented findings separately for AI/AN/NH communities. Two reported seeking indigenous reviewer feedback; none reported seeking input from tribes and communities. Approximately 7% reported on institutional review board (IRB) approval of included studies, 5% reported on tribal approval, and 4% referenced the sovereignty of AI/AN tribes. Approximately 63% used evidence from more than one AI/AN/NH population study, and 28% discussed potential benefits to communities from the synthesis research. Conclusions Reporting of ethics and community involvement are not prominent. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses making community-level inferences may pose risks to communities. Future systematic reviews and meta-analyses should consider ethical and participatory dimensions of research. PMID:25089283

Workplace-related generational characteristics of nurses: A mixed-method systematic review.

PubMed

Stevanin, Simone; Palese, Alvisa; Bressan, Valentina; Vehviläinen-Julkunen, Katri; Kvist, Tarja

2018-06-01

The aim of this study was to describe and summarize workplace characteristics of three nursing generations: Baby Boomers, Generations X and Y. Generational differences affect occupational well-being, nurses' performance, patient outcomes and safety; therefore, nurse managers, administrators and educators are interested increasingly in making evidence-based decisions about the multigenerational nursing workforce. Mixed-method systematic review. Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Scopus (January 1991-January 2017). (1) The Joanna Briggs Institute's method for conducting mixed-method systematic reviews; (2) the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and (3) the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research guidelines. The studies' methodological quality was assessed with the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. Quantitative and mixed-method studies were transformed into qualitative methods using a convergent qualitative synthesis and qualitative findings were combined with a narrative synthesis. Thirty-three studies were included with three main themes and 11 subthemes: (1) Job attitudes (work engagement; turnover intentions, reasons for leaving; reasons, incentives/disincentives to continue nursing); (2) Emotion-related job aspects (stress/resilience; well-being/job satisfaction; affective commitment; unit climate; work ethic) and (3) Practice and leadership-related aspects (autonomy; perceived competence; leadership relationships and perceptions). Baby Boomers reported lower levels of stress and burnout than did Generations X and Y, different work engagement, factors affecting workplace well-being and retention and greater intention to leave compared with Generation Y, which was less resilient, but more cohesive. Although several studies reported methodological limitations and conflicting findings, generational differences in nurses' job attitudes, emotional, practice and leadership factors should be considered to enhance workplace quality. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Using qualitative methods to understand factors contributing to patient satisfaction among dermatology patients: a systematic review.

PubMed

Gibbons, Caitlin; Singh, Sanminder; Gibbons, Brittany; Clark, Caitlin; Torres, Josefina; Cheng, Michelle Y; Wang, Elizabeth A; Armstrong, April W

2018-05-01

In this systematic review, we aimed to synthesize data that identify factors contributing to patient satisfaction in dermatology care using qualitative methods. We performed a comprehensive search of the literature using the PubMed database for articles published between January 1, 2000 and February 9, 2015. The initial search yielded 186 articles, of which 13 were included after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. The systematic review of 13 articles included a total of 330 patients. Using in-field observations and semistructured interviews, studies found that qualitative methods and analysis increased the provider's sensitivity to patient needs and enhanced patient care. Analyses using qualitative methods found increased patient satisfaction in their healthcare provider is associated with (1) confidence in the provider's diagnosis, (2) perception of patient-centered, individualized recommendations and (3) quality of patient education and provider explanation during a visit. Patient satisfaction is measured using either quantitative or qualitative methods. Quantitative methods result in standardized data that often does not capture the nuances of patient experience. In contrast, qualitative methodology is integral to gathering patient perspectives on patient care and satisfaction and should be included in future research models.

Developing and Optimising the Use of Logic Models in Systematic Reviews: Exploring Practice and Good Practice in the Use of Programme Theory in Reviews

PubMed Central

Kneale, Dylan; Thomas, James; Harris, Katherine

2015-01-01

Background Logic models are becoming an increasingly common feature of systematic reviews, as is the use of programme theory more generally in systematic reviewing. Logic models offer a framework to help reviewers to ‘think’ conceptually at various points during the review, and can be a useful tool in defining study inclusion and exclusion criteria, guiding the search strategy, identifying relevant outcomes, identifying mediating and moderating factors, and communicating review findings. Methods and Findings In this paper we critique the use of logic models in systematic reviews and protocols drawn from two databases representing reviews of health interventions and international development interventions. Programme theory featured only in a minority of the reviews and protocols included. Despite drawing from different disciplinary traditions, reviews and protocols from both sources shared several limitations in their use of logic models and theories of change, and these were used almost unanimously to solely depict pictorially the way in which the intervention worked. Logic models and theories of change were consequently rarely used to communicate the findings of the review. Conclusions Logic models have the potential to be an aid integral throughout the systematic reviewing process. The absence of good practice around their use and development may be one reason for the apparent limited utility of logic models in many existing systematic reviews. These concerns are addressed in the second half of this paper, where we offer a set of principles in the use of logic models and an example of how we constructed a logic model for a review of school-based asthma interventions. PMID:26575182

Peer review of health research funding proposals: A systematic map and systematic review of innovations for effectiveness and efficiency.

PubMed

Shepherd, Jonathan; Frampton, Geoff K; Pickett, Karen; Wyatt, Jeremy C

2018-01-01

To investigate methods and processes for timely, efficient and good quality peer review of research funding proposals in health. A two-stage evidence synthesis: (1) a systematic map to describe the key characteristics of the evidence base, followed by (2) a systematic review of the studies stakeholders prioritised as relevant from the map on the effectiveness and efficiency of peer review 'innovations'. Standard processes included literature searching, duplicate inclusion criteria screening, study keyword coding, data extraction, critical appraisal and study synthesis. A total of 83 studies from 15 countries were included in the systematic map. The evidence base is diverse, investigating many aspects of the systems for, and processes of, peer review. The systematic review included eight studies from Australia, Canada, and the USA, evaluating a broad range of peer review innovations. These studies showed that simplifying the process by shortening proposal forms, using smaller reviewer panels, or expediting processes can speed up the review process and reduce costs, but this might come at the expense of peer review quality, a key aspect that has not been assessed. Virtual peer review using videoconferencing or teleconferencing appears promising for reducing costs by avoiding the need for reviewers to travel, but again any consequences for quality have not been adequately assessed. There is increasing international research activity into the peer review of health research funding. The studies reviewed had methodological limitations and variable generalisability to research funders. Given these limitations it is not currently possible to recommend immediate implementation of these innovations. However, many appear promising based on existing evidence, and could be adapted as necessary by funders and evaluated. Where feasible, experimental evaluation, including randomised controlled trials, should be conducted, evaluating impact on effectiveness, efficiency and quality.

Guidelines for randomized clinical trial protocol content: a systematic review

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Background All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) require a protocol; however, numerous studies have highlighted protocol deficiencies. Reporting guidelines may improve the content of research reports and, if developed using robust methods, may increase the utility of reports to stakeholders. The objective of this study was to systematically identify and review RCT protocol guidelines, to assess their characteristics and methods of development, and to compare recommendations. Methods We conducted a systematic review of indexed literature (MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Methodology Register from inception to September 2010; reference lists; related article features; forward citation searching) and a targeted search of supplementary sources, including a survey of major trial funding agencies in six countries. Records were eligible if they described a content guideline in English or French relevant to RCT protocols. Guidelines were excluded if they specified content for protocols for trials of specific procedures or conditions or were intended to assess trial quality. We extracted guideline characteristics and methods. Content was mapped for a subset of guidelines that described development methods or had institutional endorsement. Results Forty guidelines published in journals, books and institutional reports were included in the review; seven were specific to RCT protocols. Only eight (20%) described development methods which included informal consensus methods, pilot testing and formal validation; no guideline described all of these methods. No guideline described formal consensus methods or a systematic retrieval of empirical evidence to inform its development. The guidelines included a median of 23 concepts per guideline (interquartile range (IQR) = 14 to 34; range = 7 to 109). Among the subset of guidelines (n = 23) for which content was mapped, approximately 380 concepts were explicitly addressed (median concepts per guideline IQR = 31 (24,80); range = 16 to 150); most concepts were addressed in a minority of guidelines. Conclusions Existing guidelines for RCT protocol content varied substantially in their recommendations. Few reports described the methods of guideline development, limiting comparisons of guideline validity. Given the importance of protocols to diverse stakeholders, we believe a systematically developed, evidence-informed guideline for clinical trial protocols is needed. PMID:23006870

Development and evaluation of 'briefing notes' as a novel knowledge translation tool to aid the implementation of sex/gender analysis in systematic reviews: a pilot study.

PubMed

Doull, Marion; Welch, Vivian; Puil, Lorri; Runnels, Vivien; Coen, Stephanie E; Shea, Beverley; O'Neill, Jennifer; Borkhoff, Cornelia; Tudiver, Sari; Boscoe, Madeline

2014-01-01

There is increasing recognition of sex/gender differences in health and the importance of identifying differential effects of interventions for men and women. Yet, to whom the research evidence does or does not apply, with regard to sex/gender, is often insufficiently answered. This is also true for systematic reviews which synthesize results of primary studies. A lack of analysis and reporting of evidence on sex/gender raises concerns about the applicability of systematic reviews. To bridge this gap, this pilot study aimed to translate knowledge about sex/gender analysis (SGA) into a user-friendly 'briefing note' format and evaluate its potential in aiding the implementation of SGA in systematic reviews. Our Sex/Gender Methods Group used an interactive process to translate knowledge about sex/gender into briefing notes, a concise communication tool used by policy and decision makers. The briefing notes were developed in collaboration with three Cochrane Collaboration review groups (HIV/AIDS, Hypertension, and Musculoskeletal) who were also the target knowledge users of the briefing notes. Briefing note development was informed by existing systematic review checklists, literature on sex/gender, in-person and virtual meetings, and consultation with topic experts. Finally, we held a workshop for potential users to evaluate the notes. Each briefing note provides tailored guidance on considering sex/gender to reviewers who are planning or conducting systematic reviews and includes the rationale for considering sex/gender, with examples specific to each review group's focus. Review authors found that the briefing notes provided welcome guidance on implementing SGA that was clear and concise, but also identified conceptual and implementation challenges. Sex/gender briefing notes are a promising knowledge translation tool. By encouraging sex/gender analysis and equity considerations in systematic reviews, the briefing notes can assist systematic reviewers in ensuring the applicability of research evidence, with the goal of improved health outcomes for diverse populations.

Reliability and validity of non-radiographic methods of thoracic kyphosis measurement: a systematic review.

PubMed

Barrett, Eva; McCreesh, Karen; Lewis, Jeremy

2014-02-01

A wide array of instruments are available for non-invasive thoracic kyphosis measurement. Guidelines for selecting outcome measures for use in clinical and research practice recommend that properties such as validity and reliability are considered. This systematic review reports on the reliability and validity of non-invasive methods for measuring thoracic kyphosis. A systematic search of 11 electronic databases located studies assessing reliability and/or validity of non-invasive thoracic kyphosis measurement techniques. Two independent reviewers used a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of retrieved studies. Data was extracted by the primary reviewer. The results were synthesized qualitatively using a level of evidence approach. 27 studies satisfied the eligibility criteria and were included in the review. The reliability, validity and both reliability and validity were investigated by sixteen, two and nine studies respectively. 17/27 studies were deemed to be of high quality. In total, 15 methods of thoracic kyphosis were evaluated in retrieved studies. All investigated methods showed high (ICC ≥ .7) to very high (ICC ≥ .9) levels of reliability. The validity of the methods ranged from low to very high. The strongest levels of evidence for reliability exists in support of the Debrunner kyphometer, Spinal Mouse and Flexicurve index, and for validity supports the arcometer and Flexicurve index. Further reliability and validity studies are required to strengthen the level of evidence for the remaining methods of measurement. This should be addressed by future research. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Economic evidence for the prevention and treatment of atopic eczema: a protocol for a systematic review.

PubMed

Sach, Tracey Helen; McManus, Emma; Mcmonagle, Christopher; Levell, Nick

2016-05-27

Eczema, synonymous with atopic eczema or atopic dermatitis, is a chronic skin disease that has a similar impact on health-related quality of life as other chronic diseases. The proposed research aims to provide a comprehensive systematic assessment of the economic evidence base available to inform economic modelling and decision making on interventions to prevent and treat eczema at any stage of the life course. Whilst the Global Resource of Eczema Trials (GREAT) database collects together the effectiveness evidence for eczema, there is currently no such systematic resource on the economics of eczema. It is important to gain an overview of the current state of the art of economic methods in the field of eczema in order to strengthen the economic evidence base further. The proposed study is a systematic review of the economic evidence surrounding interventions for the prevention and treatment of eczema. Relevant search terms will be used to search MEDLINE, EMBASE, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database, Health Technology Assessment, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EconLit, Scopus, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry and Web of Science in order to identify relevant evidence. To be eligible for inclusion studies will be primary empirical studies evaluating the cost, utility or full economic evaluation of interventions for preventing or treating eczema. Two reviewers will independently assess studies for eligibility and perform data abstraction. Evidence tables will be produced presenting details of study characteristics, costing methods, outcome methods and quality assessment. The methodological quality of studies will be assessed using accepted checklists. The systematic review is being undertaken to identify the type of economic evidence available, summarise the results of the available economic evidence and critically appraise the quality of economic evidence currently available to inform future economic modelling and resource allocation decisions about interventions to prevent or treat eczema. We aim to use the review to offer guidance about how to gather economic evidence in studies of eczema and/or what further research is necessary in order to inform this. PROSPERO CRD42015024633.

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

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.

Applicable or non-applicable: investigations of clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews.

PubMed

Chess, Laura E; Gagnier, Joel J

2016-02-17

Clinical heterogeneity can be defined as differences in participant characteristics, types or timing of outcome measurements and intervention characteristics. Clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews has the possibility to significantly affect statistical heterogeneity leading to inaccurate conclusions and misled decision making. The aim of this study is to identify to what extent investigators are assessing clinical heterogeneity in both Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews. The most recent 100 systematic reviews from the top five journals in medicine-JAMA, Archives of Internal Medicine, British Medical Journal, The Lancet, and PLOS Medicine-and the 100 most recently published and/or updated systematic reviews from Cochrane were collected. Various defined items of clinical heterogeneity were extracted from the included reviews. Investigators used chi-squared tests, logarithmic modeling and linear regressions to determine if the presence of such items served as a predictor for clinical heterogeneity when comparing Cochrane to non-Cochrane reviews. Extracted variables include number of studies, number of participants, presence of quantitative synthesis, exploration of clinical heterogeneity, heterogeneous characteristics explored, basis and methods used for investigating clinical heterogeneity, plotting/visual aids, author contact, inferences from clinical heterogeneity investigation, reporting assessment, and the presence of a priori or post-hoc analysis. A total of 317 systematic reviews were considered, of which 199 were in the final analysis. A total of 81% of Cochrane reviews and 90% of non-Cochrane reviews explored characteristics that are considered aspects of clinical heterogeneity and also described the methods they planned to use to investigate the influence of those characteristics. Only 1% of non-Cochrane reviews and 8% of Cochrane reviews explored the clinical characteristics they initially chose as potential for clinical heterogeneity. Very few studies mentioned clinician training, compliance, brand, co-interventions, dose route, ethnicity, prognostic markers and psychosocial variables as covariates to investigate as potentially clinically heterogeneous. Addressing aspects of clinical heterogeneity was not different between Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews. The ability to quantify and compare the clinical differences of trials within a meta-analysis is crucial to determining its applicability and use in clinical practice. Despite Cochrane Collaboration emphasis on methodology, the proportion of reviews that assess clinical heterogeneity is less than those of non-Cochrane reviews. Our assessment reveals that there is room for improvement in assessing clinical heterogeneity in both Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews.

What do Cochrane systematic reviews say about non-surgical interventions for urinary incontinence in women?

PubMed

Costa, Anderson Adriano Leal Freitas da; Vasconcellos, Igor Martins; Pacheco, Rafael Leite; Bella, Zsuzsanna Ilona Katalin de Jármy Di; Riera, Rachel

2018-01-01

Urinary incontinence is a highly prevalent condition that impacts self-esteem and overall quality of life. Many non-surgical treatment options are available, ranging from pharmacological approaches to pelvic exercises. We aimed to summarize the available evidence regarding these non-surgical interventions. Review of systematic reviews, conducted in the Discipline of Evidence-Based Medicine, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (EPM-UNIFESP). A sensitive search was conducted to identify all Cochrane systematic reviews that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Titles and abstracts were screened by two authors. We included 20 Cochrane systematic reviews: 4 assessing methods of vesical training, 3 evaluating pharmacological interventions, 4 studying pelvic floor muscle training approaches and 9 aimed at other alternatives (such as urethral injections, weighted vaginal cone use, acupuncture, biostimulation and radiofrequency therapy). The reviews found that the evidence regarding the benefits of these diverse interventions ranged in quality from low to high. This review included 20 Cochrane systematic reviews that provided evidence (of diverse quality) for non-pharmacological interventions for patients with urinary incontinence. Moderate to high quality of evidence was found favoring the use of pelvic floor muscle training among women with urinary incontinence. To establish solid conclusions for all the other comparisons, further studies of good methodological quality are needed.

Living systematic reviews: 3. Statistical methods for updating meta-analyses.

PubMed

Simmonds, Mark; Salanti, Georgia; McKenzie, Joanne; Elliott, Julian

2017-11-01

A living systematic review (LSR) should keep the review current as new research evidence emerges. Any meta-analyses included in the review will also need updating as new material is identified. If the aim of the review is solely to present the best current evidence standard meta-analysis may be sufficient, provided reviewers are aware that results may change at later updates. If the review is used in a decision-making context, more caution may be needed. When using standard meta-analysis methods, the chance of incorrectly concluding that any updated meta-analysis is statistically significant when there is no effect (the type I error) increases rapidly as more updates are performed. Inaccurate estimation of any heterogeneity across studies may also lead to inappropriate conclusions. This paper considers four methods to avoid some of these statistical problems when updating meta-analyses: two methods, that is, law of the iterated logarithm and the Shuster method control primarily for inflation of type I error and two other methods, that is, trial sequential analysis and sequential meta-analysis control for type I and II errors (failing to detect a genuine effect) and take account of heterogeneity. This paper compares the methods and considers how they could be applied to LSRs. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Measuring Resource Utilization: A Systematic Review of Validated Self-Reported Questionnaires.

PubMed

Leggett, Laura E; Khadaroo, Rachel G; Holroyd-Leduc, Jayna; Lorenzetti, Diane L; Hanson, Heather; Wagg, Adrian; Padwal, Raj; Clement, Fiona

2016-03-01

A variety of methods may be used to obtain costing data. Although administrative data are most commonly used, the data available in these datasets are often limited. An alternative method of obtaining costing is through self-reported questionnaires. Currently, there are no systematic reviews that summarize self-reported resource utilization instruments from the published literature.The aim of the study was to identify validated self-report healthcare resource use instruments and to map their attributes.A systematic review was conducted. The search identified articles using terms like "healthcare utilization" and "questionnaire." All abstracts and full texts were considered in duplicate. For inclusion, studies had to assess the validity of a self-reported resource use questionnaire, to report original data, include adult populations, and the questionnaire had to be publically available. Data such as type of resource utilization assessed by each questionnaire, and validation findings were extracted from each study.In all, 2343 unique citations were retrieved; 2297 were excluded during abstract review. Forty-six studies were reviewed in full text, and 15 studies were included in this systematic review. Six assessed resource utilization of patients with chronic conditions; 5 assessed mental health service utilization; 3 assessed resource utilization by a general population; and 1 assessed utilization in older populations. The most frequently measured resources included visits to general practitioners and inpatient stays; nonmedical resources were least frequently measured. Self-reported questionnaires on resource utilization had good agreement with administrative data, although, visits to general practitioners, outpatient days, and nurse visits had poorer agreement.Self-reported questionnaires are a valid method of collecting data on healthcare resource utilization.

A Youth Suicide Prevention Plan for Canada: A Systematic Review of Reviews.

PubMed

Bennett, Kathryn; Rhodes, Anne E; Duda, Stephanie; Cheung, Amy H; Manassis, Katharina; Links, Paul; Mushquash, Christopher; Braunberger, Peter; Newton, Amanda S; Kutcher, Stanley; Bridge, Jeffrey A; Santos, Robert G; Manion, Ian G; Mclennan, John D; Bagnell, Alexa; Lipman, Ellen; Rice, Maureen; Szatmari, Peter

2015-06-01

We conducted an expedited knowledge synthesis (EKS) to facilitate evidence-informed decision making concerning youth suicide prevention, specifically school-based strategies and nonschool-based interventions designed to prevent repeat attempts. Systematic review of review methods were applied. Inclusion criteria were as follows: systematic review or meta-analysis; prevention in youth 0 to 24 years; peer-reviewed English literature. Review quality was determined with AMSTAR (a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews). Nominal group methods quantified consensus on recommendations derived from the findings. No included review addressing school-based prevention (n = 7) reported decreased suicide death rates based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled cohort studies (CCSs), but reduced suicide attempts, suicidal ideation, and proxy measures of suicide risk were reported (based on RCTs and CCSs). Included reviews addressing prevention of repeat suicide attempts (n = 14) found the following: emergency department transition programs may reduce suicide deaths, hospitalizations, and treatment nonadherence (based on RCTs and CCSs); training primary care providers in depression treatment may reduce repeated attempts (based on one RCT); antidepressants may increase short-term suicide risk in some patients (based on RCTs and meta-analyses); this increase is offset by overall population-based reductions in suicide associated with antidepressant treatment of youth depression (based on observational studies); and prevention with psychosocial interventions requires further evaluation. No review addressed sex or gender differences systematically, Aboriginal youth as a special population, harm, or cost-effectiveness. Consensus on 6 recommendations ranged from 73% to 100%. Our EKS facilitates decision maker access to what is known about effective youth suicide prevention interventions. A national research-to-practice network that links researchers and decision makers is recommended to implement and evaluate promising interventions; to eliminate the use of ineffective or harmful interventions; and to clarify prevention intervention effects on death by suicide, suicide attempts, and suicidal ideation. Such a network could position Canada as a leader in youth suicide prevention.

The efficacy and efficiency of Disability Management in job-retention and job-reintegration. A systematic review.

PubMed

Lefever, Marlies; Decuman, Saskia; Perl, François; Braeckman, Lutgart; Van de Velde, Dominique

2018-01-01

Disability management (DM) is a systematic method to ensure job-retention and job-reintegration in competitive employment for individuals with a disability. There is evidence that 'returning to work' has a positive impact on the individual, the company and on the society. However, a clear overview of the efficacy and efficiency of the DM programs is scarce. To systematically review the efficacy and efficiency of the disability management programs. Cochrane, PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science were searched from 1994 to 2015. Two reviewers independently evaluated the articles on title, abstract, and full text. The data extraction and results are documented according to the study designs. Twenty-eight articles were included in the review. These 28 articles consisted of 7 systematic reviews, 3 randomized controlled trials, 9 clinical trials, 4 mixed-method studies and 5 qualitative studies. The DM program has shown to be effective and efficient. A consensus about the DM components is still not reached. Nevertheless, some components are emphasized more than others; job accommodation, facilitation of transitional duty, communication between all stakeholders, health care provider advice, early intervention, and acceptance, goodwill and trust in the stakeholders, in the organization, and in the disability management process.

Availability and performance of image/video-based vital signs monitoring methods: a systematic review protocol.

PubMed

Harford, Mirae; Catherall, Jacqueline; Gerry, Stephen; Young, Duncan; Watkinson, Peter

2017-10-25

For many vital signs, monitoring methods require contact with the patient and/or are invasive in nature. There is increasing interest in developing still and video image-guided monitoring methods that are non-contact and non-invasive. We will undertake a systematic review of still and video image-based monitoring methods. We will perform searches in multiple databases which include MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane library, IEEE Xplore and ACM Digital Library. We will use OpenGrey and Google searches to access unpublished or commercial data. We will not use language or publication date restrictions. The primary goal is to summarise current image-based vital signs monitoring methods, limited to heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturations and blood pressure. Of particular interest will be the effectiveness of image-based methods compared to reference devices. Other outcomes of interest include the quality of the method comparison studies with respect to published reporting guidelines, any limitations of non-contact non-invasive technology and application in different populations. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review of image-based non-contact methods of vital signs monitoring. Synthesis of currently available technology will facilitate future research in this highly topical area. PROSPERO CRD42016029167.

Giardiasis as a neglected disease in Brazil: Systematic review of 20 years of publications.

PubMed

Coelho, Camila Henriques; Durigan, Maurício; Leal, Diego Averaldo Guiguet; Schneider, Adriano de Bernardi; Franco, Regina Maura Bueno; Singer, Steven M

2017-10-01

Giardiasis is an intestinal infection that affects more than two hundred million people annually worldwide; it is caused by the flagellated protozoan Giardia duodenalis. In tropical countries and in low or middle-income settings, like Brazil, its prevalence can be high. There is currently no systematic review on the presence of G. duodenalis in patients, animals or water sources in Brazil. This systematic review was performed according to recommendations established by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). As databases for our searches, we have used PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Brazilian database SciELO using the keywords «Giardia*» and «Brazil». This systematic review identified research studies related to G. duodenalis in water, giardiasis in animals, prevalence of giardiasis across Brazilian regions, genotyping of strains isolated in humans, and giardiasis in indigenous populations. We also propose a network of G. duodenalis transmission in Brazil based on genotypes analyses. This is the first time within the last twenty years that a review is being published on the occurrence of G. duodenalis in Brazil, addressing relevant issues such as prevalence, molecular epidemiology and analytical methods for parasite detection.

Effect of Preventive Interventions in Mentally Ill Parents on the Mental Health of the Offspring: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Siegenthaler, Eliane; Munder, Thomas; Egger, Matthias

2012-01-01

Objective: Mental illness in parents affects the mental health of their children. A systematic review and a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of interventions to prevent mental disorders or psychological symptoms in the offspring were performed. Method: The Cochrane, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were searched for randomized controlled…

School-Based Sleep Education Programs for Short Sleep Duration in Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Chung, Ka-Fai; Chan, Man-Sum; Lam, Ying-Yin; Lai, Cindy Sin-Yee; Yeung, Wing-Fai

2017-01-01

Background: Insufficient sleep among students is a major school health problem. School-based sleep education programs tailored to reach large number of students may be one of the solutions. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to summarize the programs' effectiveness and current status. Methods: Electronic databases were searched up…

Patient-Reported Measures of Hearing Loss and Tinnitus in Pediatric Cancer and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Stark, Daniel; Rosenberg, Abby R.; Johnston, Donna; Knight, Kristin; Caperon, Lizzie; Uleryk, Elizabeth; Frazier, A. Lindsay; Sung, Lillian

2016-01-01

Purpose: We identified studies that described use of any patient-reported outcome scale for hearing loss or tinnitus among children and adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients. Method: In this systematic review, we performed electronic searches of OvidSP MEDLINE, EMBASE, and…

The Effectiveness of Mood Stabilizers and Antiepileptic Medication for the Management of Behaviour Problems in Adults with Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Deb, S.; Chaplin, R.; Sohanpal, S.; Unwin, G.; Soni, R.; Lenotre, L.

2008-01-01

Background: Psychotropic medications are used to manage behaviour problems in adults with intellectual disability (ID). One group of psychotropic medication are mood stabilizers such as lithium and some antiepileptic drugs. Method: A comprehensive systematic review was performed to determine the evidence base for the effectiveness of mood…

Strength, Pain, Function in OIF/OEF Amputees: A Nurse-Managed Program

DTIC Science & Technology

2014-03-25

resistance training and neuromuscular electrical stimulation in knee osteoarthritis : a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 13, 118... systematic review of the effects of different electromyostimulation methods on selected strength parameters in trained and elite athletes. Journal of...electrical stimulation on rehabilitation after ligament and meniscal injuries: a systematic review . Sao Paulo Medical Journal, 129(6), 414-423

Employment as a Social Determinant of Health: A Systematic Review of Longitudinal Studies Exploring the Relationship between Employment Status and Physical Health

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hergenrather, Kenneth C.; Zeglin, Robert J.; McGuire-Kuletz, Maureen; Rhodes, Scott D.

2015-01-01

Purpose: To explore employment as a social determinant of health through examining the relationship between employment status and physical health. Method: The authors explored the causal relationship between employment status and physical health through conducting a systematic review of 22 longitudinal studies conducted in Finland, France, the…

Neurocognitive Outcomes of Individuals with a Sex Chromosome Trisomy: XXX, XYY, or XXY--A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Leggett, Victoria; Jacobs, Patricia; Nation, Kate; Scerif, Gaia; Bishop, Dorothy V. M.

2010-01-01

Aim: To review systematically the neurodevelopmental characteristics of individuals with sex chromosome trisomies (SCTs). Method: A bibliographic search identified English-language articles on SCTs. The focus was on studies unbiased by clinical referral, with power of at least 0.69 to detect an effect size of 1.0. Results: We identified 35…

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Interventions Relevant for Young Offenders with Mood Disorders, Anxiety Disorders, or Self-Harm

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Townsend, Ellen; Walker, Dawn-Marie; Sargeant, Sally; Vostanis, Panos; Hawton, Keith; Stocker, Olivia; Sithole, Jabulani

2010-01-01

Background: Mood and anxiety disorders, and problems with self-harm are significant and serious issues that are common in young people in the Criminal Justice System. Aims: To examine whether interventions relevant to young offenders with mood or anxiety disorders, or problems with self-harm are effective. Method: Systematic review and…

Core Professionalism Education in Surgery: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Sarıoğlu Büke, Akile; Karabilgin Öztürkçü, Özlem Sürel; Yılmaz, Yusuf; Sayek, İskender

2018-01-01

Background: Professionalism education is one of the major elements of surgical residency education. Aims: To evaluate the studies on core professionalism education programs in surgical professionalism education. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: This systematic literature review was performed to analyze core professionalism programs for surgical residency education published in English with at least three of the following features: program developmental model/instructional design method, aims and competencies, methods of teaching, methods of assessment, and program evaluation model or method. A total of 27083 articles were retrieved using EBSCOHOST, PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, and manual search. Results: Eight articles met the selection criteria. The instructional design method was presented in only one article, which described the Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation model. Six articles were based on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education criterion, although there was significant variability in content. The most common teaching method was role modeling with scenario- and case-based learning. A wide range of assessment methods for evaluating professionalism education were reported. The Kirkpatrick model was reported in one article as a method for program evaluation. Conclusion: It is suggested that for a core surgical professionalism education program, developmental/instructional design model, aims and competencies, content, teaching methods, assessment methods, and program evaluation methods/models should be well defined, and the content should be comparable. PMID:29553464

The impact of Cochrane Systematic Reviews: a mixed method evaluation of outputs from Cochrane Review Groups supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research.

PubMed

Bunn, Frances; Trivedi, Daksha; Alderson, Phil; Hamilton, Laura; Martin, Alice; Iliffe, Steve

2014-10-27

There has been a growing emphasis on evidence-informed decision-making in health care. Systematic reviews, such as those produced by the Cochrane Collaboration, have been a key component of this movement. The UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Systematic Review Programme currently supports 20 Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs). The aim of this study was to identify the impacts of Cochrane reviews published by NIHR-funded CRGs during the years 2007-2011. We sent questionnaires to CRGs and review authors, interviewed guideline developers and used bibliometrics and documentary review to get an overview of CRG impact and to evaluate the impact of a sample of 60 Cochrane reviews. We used a framework with four categories (knowledge production, research targeting, informing policy development and impact on practice/services). A total of 1,502 new and updated reviews were produced by the 20 NIHR-funded CRGs between 2007 and 2011. The clearest impacts were on policy with a total of 483 systematic reviews cited in 247 sets of guidance: 62 were international, 175 national (87 from the UK) and 10 local. Review authors and CRGs provided some examples of impact on practice or services, for example, safer use of medication, the identification of new effective drugs or treatments and potential economic benefits through the reduction in the use of unproven or unnecessary procedures. However, such impacts are difficult to objectively document, and the majority of reviewers were unsure if their review had produced specific impacts. Qualitative data suggested that Cochrane reviews often play an instrumental role in informing guidance, although a poor fit with guideline scope or methods, reviews being out of date and a lack of communication between CRGs and guideline developers were barriers to their use. Health and economic impacts of research are generally difficult to measure. We found that to be the case with this evaluation. Impacts on knowledge production and clinical guidance were easier to identify and substantiate than those on clinical practice. Questions remain about how we define and measure impact, and more work is needed to develop suitable methods for impact analysis.

Observational evidence and strength of evidence domains: case examples

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Systematic reviews of healthcare interventions most often focus on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, certain circumstances warrant consideration of observational evidence, and such studies are increasingly being included as evidence in systematic reviews. Methods To illustrate the use of observational evidence, we present case examples of systematic reviews in which observational evidence was considered as well as case examples of individual observational studies, and how they demonstrate various strength of evidence domains in accordance with current Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) methods guidance. Results In the presented examples, observational evidence is used when RCTs are infeasible or raise ethical concerns, lack generalizability, or provide insufficient data. Individual study case examples highlight how observational evidence may fulfill required strength of evidence domains, such as study limitations (reduced risk of selection, detection, performance, and attrition); directness; consistency; precision; and reporting bias (publication, selective outcome reporting, and selective analysis reporting), as well as additional domains of dose-response association, plausible confounding that would decrease the observed effect, and strength of association (magnitude of effect). Conclusions The cases highlighted in this paper demonstrate how observational studies may provide moderate to (rarely) high strength evidence in systematic reviews. PMID:24758494

Response to "Collating science-based evidence to inform public opinion on the environmental effects of marine drilling platforms in the Mediterranean Sea".

PubMed

Haddaway, Neal R

2017-12-01

In their recent review article, Mangano and Será (Journal of Environmental Management, 188:195-202) collate and describe the evidence base relating to the impacts of marine drilling platforms in the Mediterranean. The authors claim to have undertaken a systematic map using the Guidelines for Systematic Review in Environmental Management produced by the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (CEE) as a basis for their methods. Here, I highlight major problems with their methods and the reporting of their activities. I demonstrate that a higher level of rigour and transparency is necessary for a true systematic map. Whilst their work is not without merit and may prove useful for decision-makers, their review could have been conducted and reported to a greater level of reliability. I stress the importance of transparency, comprehensiveness, and repeatability in ensuring that reviews are reliable and fit-for-purpose. I highlight the pitfalls of the authors' approach in terms of: question framing; searching for evidence; the definition of grey literature; key outputs from systematic maps; and the dangers of vote-counting. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

What is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and products.

PubMed

Miake-Lye, Isomi M; Hempel, Susanne; Shanman, Roberta; Shekelle, Paul G

2016-02-10

The need for systematic methods for reviewing evidence is continuously increasing. Evidence mapping is one emerging method. There are no authoritative recommendations for what constitutes an evidence map or what methods should be used, and anecdotal evidence suggests heterogeneity in both. Our objectives are to identify published evidence maps and to compare and contrast the presented definitions of evidence mapping, the domains used to classify data in evidence maps, and the form the evidence map takes. We conducted a systematic review of publications that presented results with a process termed "evidence mapping" or included a figure called an "evidence map." We identified publications from searches of ten databases through 8/21/2015, reference mining, and consulting topic experts. We abstracted the research question, the unit of analysis, the search methods and search period covered, and the country of origin. Data were narratively synthesized. Thirty-nine publications met inclusion criteria. Published evidence maps varied in their definition and the form of the evidence map. Of the 31 definitions provided, 67 % described the purpose as identification of gaps and 58 % referenced a stakeholder engagement process or user-friendly product. All evidence maps explicitly used a systematic approach to evidence synthesis. Twenty-six publications referred to a figure or table explicitly called an "evidence map," eight referred to an online database as the evidence map, and five stated they used a mapping methodology but did not present a visual depiction of the evidence. The principal conclusion of our evaluation of studies that call themselves "evidence maps" is that the implied definition of what constitutes an evidence map is a systematic search of a broad field to identify gaps in knowledge and/or future research needs that presents results in a user-friendly format, often a visual figure or graph, or a searchable database. Foundational work is needed to better standardize the methods and products of an evidence map so that researchers and policymakers will know what to expect of this new type of evidence review. Although an a priori protocol was developed, no registration was completed; this review did not fit the PROSPERO format.

Guidelines for randomized clinical trial protocol content: a systematic review.

PubMed

Tetzlaff, Jennifer M; Chan, An-Wen; Kitchen, Jessica; Sampson, Margaret; Tricco, Andrea C; Moher, David

2012-09-24

All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) require a protocol; however, numerous studies have highlighted protocol deficiencies. Reporting guidelines may improve the content of research reports and, if developed using robust methods, may increase the utility of reports to stakeholders. The objective of this study was to systematically identify and review RCT protocol guidelines, to assess their characteristics and methods of development, and to compare recommendations. We conducted a systematic review of indexed literature (MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Methodology Register from inception to September 2010; reference lists; related article features; forward citation searching) and a targeted search of supplementary sources, including a survey of major trial funding agencies in six countries. Records were eligible if they described a content guideline in English or French relevant to RCT protocols. Guidelines were excluded if they specified content for protocols for trials of specific procedures or conditions or were intended to assess trial quality. We extracted guideline characteristics and methods. Content was mapped for a subset of guidelines that described development methods or had institutional endorsement. Forty guidelines published in journals, books and institutional reports were included in the review; seven were specific to RCT protocols. Only eight (20%) described development methods which included informal consensus methods, pilot testing and formal validation; no guideline described all of these methods. No guideline described formal consensus methods or a systematic retrieval of empirical evidence to inform its development. The guidelines included a median of 23 concepts per guideline (interquartile range (IQR) = 14 to 34; range = 7 to 109). Among the subset of guidelines (n = 23) for which content was mapped, approximately 380 concepts were explicitly addressed (median concepts per guideline IQR = 31 (24,80); range = 16 to 150); most concepts were addressed in a minority of guidelines. Existing guidelines for RCT protocol content varied substantially in their recommendations. Few reports described the methods of guideline development, limiting comparisons of guideline validity. Given the importance of protocols to diverse stakeholders, we believe a systematically developed, evidence-informed guideline for clinical trial protocols is needed.

What guidance is available for researchers conducting overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions? A scoping review and qualitative metasummary.

PubMed

Pollock, Michelle; Fernandes, Ricardo M; Becker, Lorne A; Featherstone, Robin; Hartling, Lisa

2016-11-14

Overviews of reviews (overviews) compile data from multiple systematic reviews to provide a single synthesis of relevant evidence for decision-making. Despite their increasing popularity, there is limited methodological guidance available for researchers wishing to conduct overviews. The objective of this scoping review is to identify and collate all published and unpublished documents containing guidance for conducting overviews examining the efficacy, effectiveness, and/or safety of healthcare interventions. Our aims were to provide a map of existing guidance documents; identify similarities, differences, and gaps in the guidance contained within these documents; and identify common challenges involved in conducting overviews. We conducted an iterative and extensive search to ensure breadth and comprehensiveness of coverage. The search involved reference tracking, database and web searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE, DARE, Scopus, Cochrane Methods Studies Database, Google Scholar), handsearching of websites and conference proceedings, and contacting overview producers. Relevant guidance statements and challenges encountered were extracted, edited, grouped, abstracted, and presented using a qualitative metasummary approach. We identified 52 guidance documents produced by 19 research groups. Relatively consistent guidance was available for the first stages of the overview process (deciding when and why to conduct an overview, specifying the scope, and searching for and including systematic reviews). In contrast, there was limited or conflicting guidance for the latter stages of the overview process (quality assessment of systematic reviews and their primary studies, collecting and analyzing data, and assessing quality of evidence), and many of the challenges identified were also related to these stages. An additional, overarching challenge identified was that overviews are limited by the methods, reporting, and coverage of their included systematic reviews. This compilation of methodological guidance for conducting overviews of healthcare interventions will facilitate the production of future overviews and can help authors address key challenges they are likely to encounter. The results of this project have been used to identify areas where future methodological research is required to generate empirical evidence for overview methods. Additionally, these results have been used to update the chapter on overviews in the next edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

The effectiveness of opioid substitution treatments for patients with opioid dependence: a systematic review and multiple treatment comparison protocol

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Opioids are psychoactive analgesic drugs prescribed for pain relief and palliative care. Due to their addictive potential, effort and vigilance in controlling prescriptions is needed to avoid misuse and dependence. Despite the effort, the prevalence of opioid use disorder continues to rise. Opioid substitution therapies are commonly used to treat opioid dependence; however, there is minimal consensus as to which therapy is most effective. Available treatments include methadone, heroin, buprenorphine, as well as naltrexone. This systematic review aims to assess and compare the effect of all available opioid substitution therapies on the treatment of opioid dependence. Methods/Design The authors will search Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Cochrane Clinical Trials Registry, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal, and the National Institutes for Health Clinical Trials Registry. The title, abstract, and full-text screening will be completed in duplicate. When appropriate, multiple treatment comparison Bayesian meta-analytic methods will be performed to deduce summary statistics estimating the effectiveness of all opioid substitution therapies in terms of retention and response to treatment (as measured through continued opioid abuse). Discussion Using evidence gained from this systematic review, we anticipate disseminating an objective review of the current available literature on the effectiveness of all opioid substitution therapies for the treatment of opioid use disorder. The results of this systematic review are imperative to the further enhancement of clinical practice in addiction medicine. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42013006507. PMID:25239213

The Navigation Guide—Evidence-Based Medicine Meets Environmental Health: Systematic Review of Human Evidence for PFOA Effects on Fetal Growth

PubMed Central

Sutton, Patrice; Atchley, Dylan S.; Koustas, Erica; Lam, Juleen; Sen, Saunak; Robinson, Karen A.; Axelrad, Daniel A.; Woodruff, Tracey J.

2014-01-01

Background: The Navigation Guide methodology was developed to meet the need for a robust method of systematic and transparent research synthesis in environmental health science. We conducted a case study systematic review to support proof of concept of the method. Objective: We applied the Navigation Guide systematic review methodology to determine whether developmental exposure to perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) affects fetal growth in humans. Methods: We applied the first 3 steps of the Navigation Guide methodology to human epidemiological data: 1) specify the study question, 2) select the evidence, and 3) rate the quality and strength of the evidence. We developed a protocol, conducted a comprehensive search of the literature, and identified relevant studies using prespecified criteria. We evaluated each study for risk of bias and conducted meta-analyses on a subset of studies. We rated quality and strength of the entire body of human evidence. Results: We identified 18 human studies that met our inclusion criteria, and 9 of these were combined through meta-analysis. Through meta-analysis, we estimated that a 1-ng/mL increase in serum or plasma PFOA was associated with a –18.9 g (95% CI: –29.8, –7.9) difference in birth weight. We concluded that the risk of bias across studies was low, and we assigned a “moderate” quality rating to the overall body of human evidence. Conclusion: On the basis of this first application of the Navigation Guide systematic review methodology, we concluded that there is “sufficient” human evidence that developmental exposure to PFOA reduces fetal growth. Citation: Johnson PI, Sutton P, Atchley DS, Koustas E, Lam J, Sen S, Robinson KA, Axelrad DA, Woodruff TJ. 2014. The Navigation Guide—evidence-based medicine meets environmental health: systematic review of human evidence for PFOA effects on fetal growth. Environ Health Perspect 122:1028–1039; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1307893 PMID:24968388

Complementary and Alternative Medicine for Cancer Pain: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

PubMed Central

Bao, Yanju; Kong, Xiangying; Yang, Liping; Liu, Rui; Shi, Zhan; Li, Weidong; Hua, Baojin; Hou, Wei

2014-01-01

Background and Objective. Now with more and more published systematic reviews of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) on adult cancer pain, it is necessary to use the methods of overview of systematic review to summarize available evidence, appraise the evidence level, and give suggestions to future research and practice. Methods. A comprehensive search (the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and ISI Web of Knowledge) was conducted to identify all systematic reviews or meta-analyses of CAM on adult cancer pain. And the evidence levels were evaluated using GRADE approach. Results. 27 systematic reviews were included. Based on available evidence, we could find that psychoeducational interventions, music interventions, acupuncture plus drug therapy, Chinese herbal medicine plus cancer therapy, compound kushen injection, reflexology, lycopene, TENS, qigong, cupping, cannabis, Reiki, homeopathy (Traumeel), and creative arts therapies might have beneficial effects on adult cancer pain. No benefits were found for acupuncture (versus drug therapy or shame acupuncture), and the results were inconsistent for massage therapy, transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS), and Viscum album L plus cancer treatment. However, the evidence levels for these interventions were low or moderate due to high risk of bias and/or small sample size of primary studies. Conclusion. CAM may be beneficial for alleviating cancer pain, but the evidence levels were found to be low or moderate. Future large and rigor randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm the benefits of CAM on adult cancer pain. PMID:24817897

Complementary and alternative medicine for cancer pain: an overview of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Bao, Yanju; Kong, Xiangying; Yang, Liping; Liu, Rui; Shi, Zhan; Li, Weidong; Hua, Baojin; Hou, Wei

2014-01-01

Background and Objective. Now with more and more published systematic reviews of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) on adult cancer pain, it is necessary to use the methods of overview of systematic review to summarize available evidence, appraise the evidence level, and give suggestions to future research and practice. Methods. A comprehensive search (the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and ISI Web of Knowledge) was conducted to identify all systematic reviews or meta-analyses of CAM on adult cancer pain. And the evidence levels were evaluated using GRADE approach. Results. 27 systematic reviews were included. Based on available evidence, we could find that psychoeducational interventions, music interventions, acupuncture plus drug therapy, Chinese herbal medicine plus cancer therapy, compound kushen injection, reflexology, lycopene, TENS, qigong, cupping, cannabis, Reiki, homeopathy (Traumeel), and creative arts therapies might have beneficial effects on adult cancer pain. No benefits were found for acupuncture (versus drug therapy or shame acupuncture), and the results were inconsistent for massage therapy, transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS), and Viscum album L plus cancer treatment. However, the evidence levels for these interventions were low or moderate due to high risk of bias and/or small sample size of primary studies. Conclusion. CAM may be beneficial for alleviating cancer pain, but the evidence levels were found to be low or moderate. Future large and rigor randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm the benefits of CAM on adult cancer pain.

Integra-based Reconstruction of Large Scalp Wounds: A Case Report and Systematic Review of the Literature

PubMed Central

Johnson, Maxwell B.

2016-01-01

Background: Large complex scalp wounds that have traditionally required free vascularized tissue transfer have been successfully reconstructed with skin substitutes such as Integra. Although there are multiple reports of Integra-based reconstructions of scalp wounds, there has not been a comprehensive assessment of this body of literature that critically examines this method. Our goal was to conduct a systematic review to determine the effectiveness of Integra-based reconstructions of scalp wounds, with emphasis on large defects. Methods: A comprehensive systematic review was completed using key search terms, including Integra, dermal regeneration template, bovine collagen, skin substitute, forehead, and scalp. Selected articles reported characteristics of patients and their reconstructions. The primary outcome measures were wound complications and percent graft take. Results: Thirty-four articles were included in this systematic review. Wound sizes ranged from 5.7 to 610 cm2, with 35.3% of articles reporting a mean defect size >100 cm2. Thirty-two articles reported mean percent take of skin graft ≥90%. Sixteen articles reported a minor complication. There were no major complications associated with the reconstructions. Conclusions: There is a substantial evidence base for the use of Integra to reconstruct scalp wounds. To date, the dermal regeneration template is generally reserved for salvage procedures or when the patient cannot tolerate free tissue transfer. Based on the findings of this systematic review and the authors’ clinical experience, Integra can be used to achieve predictable results in large complex scalp defects. PMID:27826471

Quality of systematic reviews in pediatric oncology--a systematic review.

PubMed

Lundh, Andreas; Knijnenburg, Sebastiaan L; Jørgensen, Anders W; van Dalen, Elvira C; Kremer, Leontien C M

2009-12-01

To ensure evidence-based decision making in pediatric oncology systematic reviews are necessary. The objective of our study was to evaluate the methodological quality of all currently existing systematic reviews in pediatric oncology. We identified eligible systematic reviews through a systematic search of the literature. Data on clinical and methodological characteristics of the included systematic reviews were extracted. The methodological quality of the included systematic reviews was assessed using the overview quality assessment questionnaire, a validated 10-item quality assessment tool. We compared the methodological quality of systematic reviews published in regular journals with that of Cochrane systematic reviews. We included 117 systematic reviews, 99 systematic reviews published in regular journals and 18 Cochrane systematic reviews. The average methodological quality of systematic reviews was low for all ten items, but the quality of Cochrane systematic reviews was significantly higher than systematic reviews published in regular journals. On a 1-7 scale, the median overall quality score for all systematic reviews was 2 (range 1-7), with a score of 1 (range 1-7) for systematic reviews in regular journals compared to 6 (range 3-7) in Cochrane systematic reviews (p<0.001). Most systematic reviews in the field of pediatric oncology seem to have serious methodological flaws leading to a high risk of bias. While Cochrane systematic reviews were of higher methodological quality than systematic reviews in regular journals, some of them also had methodological problems. Therefore, the methodology of each individual systematic review should be scrutinized before accepting its results.

Contraceptive use and method choice among women with opioid and other substance use disorders: A systematic review.

PubMed

Terplan, Mishka; Hand, Dennis J; Hutchinson, Melissa; Salisbury-Afshar, Elizabeth; Heil, Sarah H

2015-11-01

To systematically review the literature on contraceptive use by women with opioid and other substance use disorders in order to estimate overall contraceptive use and to examine method choice given the alarmingly high rate of unintended pregnancy in this population. Pubmed (1948-2014) and PsycINFO (1806-2014) databases were searched for peer-reviewed journal articles using a systematic search strategy. Only articles published in English and reporting contraceptive use within samples of women with opioid and other substance use disorders were eligible for inclusion. Out of 580 abstracts reviewed, 105 articles were given a full-text review, and 24 studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority (51%) of women in these studies reported using opioids, with much smaller percentages reporting alcohol and cocaine use. Across studies, contraceptive prevalence ranged widely, from 6%-77%, with a median of 55%. Results from a small subset of studies (N=6) suggest that women with opioid and other substance use disorders used contraception less often than non-drug-using comparison populations (56% vs. 81%, respectively). Regarding method choice, condoms were the most prevalent method, accounting for a median of 62% of contraceptives used, while use of more effective methods, especially implants and intrauterine devices (IUDs), was far less prevalent 8%. Women with opioid and other substance use disorders have an unmet need for contraception, especially for the most effective methods. Offering contraception services in conjunction with substance use treatment and promoting use of more effective methods could help meet this need and reduce unintended pregnancy in this population. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Effectiveness of Mechanisms and Models of Coordination between Organizations, Agencies and Bodies Providing or Financing Health Services in Humanitarian Crises: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Akl, Elie A.; El-Jardali, Fadi; Bou Karroum, Lama; El-Eid, Jamale; Brax, Hneine; Akik, Chaza; Osman, Mona; Hassan, Ghayda; Itani, Mira; Farha, Aida; Pottie, Kevin; Oliver, Sandy

2015-01-01

Background Effective coordination between organizations, agencies and bodies providing or financing health services in humanitarian crises is required to ensure efficiency of services, avoid duplication, and improve equity. The objective of this review was to assess how, during and after humanitarian crises, different mechanisms and models of coordination between organizations, agencies and bodies providing or financing health services compare in terms of access to health services and health outcomes. Methods We registered a protocol for this review in PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews under number PROSPERO2014:CRD42014009267. Eligible studies included randomized and nonrandomized designs, process evaluations and qualitative methods. We electronically searched Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the WHO Global Health Library and websites of relevant organizations. We followed standard systematic review methodology for the selection, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. Results Of 14,309 identified citations from databases and organizations' websites, we identified four eligible studies. Two studies used mixed-methods, one used quantitative methods, and one used qualitative methods. The available evidence suggests that information coordination between bodies providing health services in humanitarian crises settings may be effective in improving health systems inputs. There is additional evidence suggesting that management/directive coordination such as the cluster model may improve health system inputs in addition to access to health services. None of the included studies assessed coordination through common representation and framework coordination. The evidence was judged to be of very low quality. Conclusion This systematic review provides evidence of possible effectiveness of information coordination and management/directive coordination between organizations, agencies and bodies providing or financing health services in humanitarian crises. Our findings can inform the research agenda and highlight the need for improving conduct and reporting of research in this field. PMID:26332670

Publication bias is underreported in systematic reviews published in high-impact-factor journals: metaepidemiologic study.

PubMed

Onishi, Akira; Furukawa, Toshi A

2014-12-01

To examine how often a significant publication bias (PB) existed when the assessment of PB was not reported in systematic reviews. All systematic reviews with meta-analyses of interventions and risk/prognostic factors published in the general medical journals with the top 10 impact factors in 2011 and 2012 were included. The results regarding PB were extracted. When the assessment of PB was not reported, we examined the presence of PB using the Egger test and contour-enhanced funnel plot and the impact of unreported PB by regression-based method. Among all the identified 116 reviews, the assessment of PB was not reported in 36 reviews (31.0%), particularly in reviews without a comprehensive literature search. Of these 36 reviews, seven (19.4%) were found to have a significant PB. The original pooled results may have been overestimated by a median of 50.9% if corrected for PB. Among the 28 reviews with PB including both reviews that did or did not report the assessment of PB, seven reviews (25.0%) did not report the presence of PB. Significant PB was underreported in systematic reviews published in high-impact-factor journals (eg, 19.4% of those that did not report assessment of PB had significant PB). Readers of systematic reviews should not assume that PB does not exist when not reported whereas researchers should report the results of assessments for PB. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Strategies for obtaining unpublished drug trial data: a qualitative interview study

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Background Authors of systematic reviews have difficulty obtaining unpublished data for their reviews. This project aimed to provide an in-depth description of the experiences of authors in searching for and gaining access to unpublished data for their systematic reviews, and to give guidance on best practices for identifying, obtaining and using unpublished data. Methods This is a qualitative study analyzing in-depth interviews with authors of systematic reviews who have published Cochrane reviews or published systematic reviews outside of The Cochrane Library. We included participants who 1) were the first or senior author of a published systematic review of a drug intervention, 2) had expertise in conducting systematic reviews, searching for data, and assessing methodological biases, and 3) were able to participate in an interview in English. We used non-random sampling techniques to identify potential participants. Eighteen Cochrane authors were contacted and 16 agreed to be interviewed (89% response rate). Twenty-four non-Cochrane authors were contacted and 16 were interviewed (67% response rate). Results Respondents had different understandings of what was meant by unpublished data, including specific outcomes and methodological details. Contacting study authors was the most common method used to obtain unpublished data and the value of regulatory agencies as a data source was underappreciated. Using the data obtained was time consuming and labor intensive. Respondents described the collaboration with other colleagues and/or students required to organize, manage and use the data in their reviews, generally developing and using templates, spreadsheets and computer programs for data extraction and analysis. Respondents had a shared belief that data should be accessible but some had concerns about sharing their own data. Respondents believed that obtaining unpublished data for reviews has important public health implications. There was widespread support for government intervention to ensure open access to trial data. Conclusions Respondents uniformly agreed that the benefit of identifying unpublished data was worth the effort and was necessary to identify the true harms and benefits of drugs. Recent actions by government, such as increased availability of trial data from the European Medicines Agency, may make it easier to acquire critical drug trial data. PMID:23680054

Preoperative identification of a suspicious adnexal mass: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PubMed

Dodge, Jason E; Covens, Allan L; 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 strategy for preoperative identification of the adnexal mass suspicious for ovarian cancer. A review of all systematic reviews and guidelines published between 1999 and 2009 was conducted as a first step. After the identification of a 2004 AHRQ systematic review on the topic, searches of MEDLINE for studies published since 2004 was also conducted to update and supplement the evidentiary base. A bivariate, random-effects meta-regression model was used to produce summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity and to plot summary ROC curves with 95% confidence regions. Four meta-analyses and 53 primary studies were included in this review. The diagnostic performance of each technology was compared and contrasted based on the summary data on sensitivity and specificity obtained from the meta-analysis. Results suggest that 3D ultrasonography has both a higher sensitivity and specificity when compared to 2D ultrasound. Established morphological scoring systems also performed with respectable sensitivity and specificity, each with equivalent diagnostic competence. Explicit scoring systems did not perform as well as other diagnostic testing methods. Assessment of an adnexal mass by colour Doppler technology was neither as sensitive nor as specific as simple ultrasonography. Of the three imaging modalities considered, MRI appeared to perform the best, although results were not statistically different from CT. PET did not perform as well as either MRI or CT. The measurement of the CA-125 tumour marker appears to be less reliable than do other available assessment methods. The best available evidence was collected and included in this rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis. The abundant evidentiary base provided the context and direction for the diagnosis of early-staged ovarian cancer. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Semi-automating the manual literature search for systematic reviews increases efficiency.

PubMed

Chapman, Andrea L; Morgan, Laura C; Gartlehner, Gerald

2010-03-01

To minimise retrieval bias, manual literature searches are a key part of the search process of any systematic review. Considering the need to have accurate information, valid results of the manual literature search are essential to ensure scientific standards; likewise efficient approaches that minimise the amount of personnel time required to conduct a manual literature search are of great interest. The objective of this project was to determine the validity and efficiency of a new manual search method that utilises the scopus database. We used the traditional manual search approach as the gold standard to determine the validity and efficiency of the proposed scopus method. Outcome measures included completeness of article detection and personnel time involved. Using both methods independently, we compared the results based on accuracy of the results, validity and time spent conducting the search, efficiency. Regarding accuracy, the scopus method identified the same studies as the traditional approach indicating its validity. In terms of efficiency, using scopus led to a time saving of 62.5% compared with the traditional approach (3 h versus 8 h). The scopus method can significantly improve the efficiency of manual searches and thus of systematic reviews.

Effective teaching strategies and methods of delivery for patient education: a systematic review and practice guideline recommendations.

PubMed

Friedman, Audrey Jusko; Cosby, Roxanne; Boyko, Susan; Hatton-Bauer, Jane; Turnbull, Gale

2011-03-01

The objective of this study was to determine effective teaching strategies and methods of delivery for patient education (PE). A systematic review was conducted and reviews with or without meta-analyses, which examined teaching strategies and methods of delivery for PE, were included. Teaching strategies identified are traditional lectures, discussions, simulated games, computer technology, written material, audiovisual sources, verbal recall, demonstration, and role playing. Methods of delivery focused on how to deliver the teaching strategies. Teaching strategies that increased knowledge, decreased anxiety, and increased satisfaction included computer technology, audio and videotapes, written materials, and demonstrations. Various teaching strategies used in combination were similarly successful. Moreover, structured-, culturally appropriate- and patient-specific teachings were found to be better than ad hoc teaching or generalized teaching. Findings provide guidance for establishing provincial standards for the delivery of PE. Recommendations concerning the efficacy of the teaching strategies and delivery methods are provided.

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.

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, wider adoption of linguistic approaches may facilitate improved rigor and richness in research synthesis. © 2017 Society for Conservation Biology.

Single-Case Experimental Designs: A Systematic Review of Published Research and Current Standards

PubMed Central

Smith, Justin D.

2013-01-01

This article systematically reviews the research design and methodological characteristics of single-case experimental design (SCED) research published in peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2010. SCEDs provide researchers with a flexible and viable alternative to group designs with large sample sizes. However, methodological challenges have precluded widespread implementation and acceptance of the SCED as a viable complementary methodology to the predominant group design. This article includes a description of the research design, measurement, and analysis domains distinctive to the SCED; a discussion of the results within the framework of contemporary standards and guidelines in the field; and a presentation of updated benchmarks for key characteristics (e.g., baseline sampling, method of analysis), and overall, it provides researchers and reviewers with a resource for conducting and evaluating SCED research. The results of the systematic review of 409 studies suggest that recently published SCED research is largely in accordance with contemporary criteria for experimental quality. Analytic method emerged as an area of discord. Comparison of the findings of this review with historical estimates of the use of statistical analysis indicates an upward trend, but visual analysis remains the most common analytic method and also garners the most support amongst those entities providing SCED standards. Although consensus exists along key dimensions of single-case research design and researchers appear to be practicing within these parameters, there remains a need for further evaluation of assessment and sampling techniques and data analytic methods. PMID:22845874

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 Australia, one from Iran and one from South-east Asia (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines), with one study covering both Canada and UK. In total, the 15 studies covered eight countries from four continents. Of 2495 participants in the 15 studies, at least 1343 (53.8%) were physicians. Perceived facilitators to the use of evidence from systematic reviews varied. The 15 studies yielded 54 potential facilitators to systematic review uptake. The five most commonly reported perceived facilitators to uptake of evidence from systematic reviews were the following: the perception that systematic reviews have multiple uses for improving knowledge, research, clinical protocols and evidence-based medicine skills (6/15); a content that included benefits, harms and costs and is current, transparent and timely (6/15); a format with a 1:3:25 staged access and executive summary (5/15); training in use (4/15); and peer-group support (4/15). The results expand our understanding of how multiple factors act as facilitators to optimal clinical practice. This systematic review reveals that interventions to foster uptake of evidence from systematic reviews, meta-analyses and The Cochrane Library can build on a broad range of facilitators. © 2012 The Authors. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare © 2012 The Joanna Briggs Institute.

The Role of Google Scholar in Evidence Reviews and Its Applicability to Grey Literature Searching

PubMed Central

Haddaway, Neal Robert; Collins, Alexandra Mary; Coughlin, Deborah; Kirk, Stuart

2015-01-01

Google Scholar (GS), a commonly used web-based academic search engine, catalogues between 2 and 100 million records of both academic and grey literature (articles not formally published by commercial academic publishers). Google Scholar collates results from across the internet and is free to use. As a result it has received considerable attention as a method for searching for literature, particularly in searches for grey literature, as required by systematic reviews. The reliance on GS as a standalone resource has been greatly debated, however, and its efficacy in grey literature searching has not yet been investigated. Using systematic review case studies from environmental science, we investigated the utility of GS in systematic reviews and in searches for grey literature. Our findings show that GS results contain moderate amounts of grey literature, with the majority found on average at page 80. We also found that, when searched for specifically, the majority of literature identified using Web of Science was also found using GS. However, our findings showed moderate/poor overlap in results when similar search strings were used in Web of Science and GS (10–67%), and that GS missed some important literature in five of six case studies. Furthermore, a general GS search failed to find any grey literature from a case study that involved manual searching of organisations’ websites. If used in systematic reviews for grey literature, we recommend that searches of article titles focus on the first 200 to 300 results. We conclude that whilst Google Scholar can find much grey literature and specific, known studies, it should not be used alone for systematic review searches. Rather, it forms a powerful addition to other traditional search methods. In addition, we advocate the use of tools to transparently document and catalogue GS search results to maintain high levels of transparency and the ability to be updated, critical to systematic reviews. PMID:26379270

The Role of Google Scholar in Evidence Reviews and Its Applicability to Grey Literature Searching.

PubMed

Haddaway, Neal Robert; Collins, Alexandra Mary; Coughlin, Deborah; Kirk, Stuart

2015-01-01

Google Scholar (GS), a commonly used web-based academic search engine, catalogues between 2 and 100 million records of both academic and grey literature (articles not formally published by commercial academic publishers). Google Scholar collates results from across the internet and is free to use. As a result it has received considerable attention as a method for searching for literature, particularly in searches for grey literature, as required by systematic reviews. The reliance on GS as a standalone resource has been greatly debated, however, and its efficacy in grey literature searching has not yet been investigated. Using systematic review case studies from environmental science, we investigated the utility of GS in systematic reviews and in searches for grey literature. Our findings show that GS results contain moderate amounts of grey literature, with the majority found on average at page 80. We also found that, when searched for specifically, the majority of literature identified using Web of Science was also found using GS. However, our findings showed moderate/poor overlap in results when similar search strings were used in Web of Science and GS (10-67%), and that GS missed some important literature in five of six case studies. Furthermore, a general GS search failed to find any grey literature from a case study that involved manual searching of organisations' websites. If used in systematic reviews for grey literature, we recommend that searches of article titles focus on the first 200 to 300 results. We conclude that whilst Google Scholar can find much grey literature and specific, known studies, it should not be used alone for systematic review searches. Rather, it forms a powerful addition to other traditional search methods. In addition, we advocate the use of tools to transparently document and catalogue GS search results to maintain high levels of transparency and the ability to be updated, critical to systematic reviews.

Prevalence of Celiac Disease in Latin America: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression

PubMed Central

Parra-Medina, Rafael; Molano-Gonzalez, Nicolás; Rojas-Villarraga, Adriana; Agmon-Levin, Nancy; Arango, Maria-Teresa; Shoenfeld, Yehuda; Anaya, Juan-Manuel

2015-01-01

Background Celiac disease (CD) is an immune-mediated enteropathy triggered by the ingestion of gluten in susceptible individuals, and its prevalence varies depending on the studied population. Given that information on CD in Latin America is scarce, we aimed to investigate the prevalence of CD in this region of the world through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods and Findings This was a two-phase study. First, a cross-sectional analysis from 981 individuals of the Colombian population was made. Second, a systematic review and meta-regression analysis were performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta- Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Our results disclosed a lack of celiac autoimmunity in the studied Colombian population (i.e., anti-tissue transglutaminase (tTG) and IgA anti-endomysium (EMA)). In the systematic review, 72 studies were considered. The estimated prevalence of CD in Latin Americans ranged between 0.46% and 0.64%. The prevalence of CD in first-degree relatives of CD probands was 5.5%. The coexistence of CD and type 1 diabetes mellitus varied from 4.6% to 8.7%, depending on the diagnosis methods (i.e., autoantibodies and/or biopsies). Conclusions Although CD seems to be a rare condition in Colombians; the general prevalence of the disease in Latin Americans seemingly corresponds to a similar scenario observed in Europeans. PMID:25942408

Methodologic quality of meta-analyses and systematic reviews on the Mediterranean diet and cardiovascular disease outcomes: a review.

PubMed

Huedo-Medina, Tania B; Garcia, Marissa; Bihuniak, Jessica D; Kenny, Anne; Kerstetter, Jane

2016-03-01

Several systematic reviews/meta-analyses published within the past 10 y have examined the associations of Mediterranean-style diets (MedSDs) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. However, these reviews have not been evaluated for satisfying contemporary methodologic quality standards. This study evaluated the quality of recent systematic reviews/meta-analyses on MedSD and CVD risk outcomes by using an established methodologic quality scale. The relation between review quality and impact per publication value of the journal in which the article had been published was also evaluated. To assess compliance with current standards, we applied a modified version of the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTARMedSD) quality scale to systematic reviews/meta-analyses retrieved from electronic databases that had met our selection criteria: 1) used systematic or meta-analytic procedures to review the literature, 2) examined MedSD trials, and 3) had MedSD interventions independently or combined with other interventions. Reviews completely satisfied from 8% to 75% of the AMSTARMedSD items (mean ± SD: 31.2% ± 19.4%), with those published in higher-impact journals having greater quality scores. At a minimum, 60% of the 24 reviews did not disclose full search details or apply appropriate statistical methods to combine study findings. Only 5 of the reviews included participant or study characteristics in their analyses, and none evaluated MedSD diet characteristics. These data suggest that current meta-analyses/systematic reviews evaluating the effect of MedSD on CVD risk do not fully comply with contemporary methodologic quality standards. As a result, there are more research questions to answer to enhance our understanding of how MedSD affects CVD risk or how these effects may be modified by the participant or MedSD characteristics. To clarify the associations between MedSD and CVD risk, future meta-analyses and systematic reviews should not only follow methodologic quality standards but also include more statistical modeling results when data allow. © 2016 American Society for Nutrition.

Evidence from the Cochrane Collaboration for Traditional Chinese Medicine Therapies

PubMed Central

Wieland, Susan; Kimbrough, Elizabeth; Cheng, Ker; Berman, Brian M.

2009-01-01

Abstract Background The Cochrane Collaboration, an international not-for-profit organization that prepares and maintains systematic reviews of randomized trials of health care therapies, has produced reviews summarizing much of the evidence on Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). Our objective was to review the evidence base according to Cochrane systematic reviews. Methods In order to detect reviews focusing on TCM, we searched the titles and abstracts of all reviews in Issue 4, 2008 of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. For each review, we extracted data on the number of trials included and the total number of participants. We provided an indication of the strength of the review findings by assessing the reviewers' abstract conclusions statement. We supplemented our assessment of the abstract conclusions statements with a listing of the comparisons and outcomes showing statistically significant meta-analyses results. Results We identified 70 Cochrane systematic reviews of TCM, primarily acupuncture (n = 26) and Chinese herbal medicine (n = 42), and 1 each of moxibustion and t'ai chi. Nineteen (19) of 26 acupuncture reviews and 22/42 herbal medicine reviews concluded that there was not enough good quality trial evidence to make any conclusion about the efficacy of the evaluated treatment, while the remaining 7 acupuncture and 20 herbal medicine reviews and each of the moxibustion and t'ai chi reviews indicated a suggestion of benefit, which was qualified by a caveat about the poor quality and quantity of studies. Most reviews included many distinct interventions, controls, outcomes, and populations, and a large number of different comparisons were made, each with a distinct forest plot. Conclusions Most Cochrane systematic reviews of TCM are inconclusive, due specifically to the poor methodology and heterogeneity of the studies reviewed. Some systematic reviews provide preliminary evidence of Chinese medicine's benefits to certain patient populations, underscoring the importance and appropriateness of further research. These preliminary findings should be considered tentative and need to be confirmed with rigorous randomized controlled trials. PMID:19757977

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 responses. PMID:25860572

Behavioral Treatment of Children's Fears and Phobias: A Review.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Morris, Richard J.; Kratochwill, Thomas R.

1985-01-01

An overview of the behaviorally-oriented fear reduction methods for children is presented. Systematic desensitization and related procedures, flooding-related therapies, contingency management approaches, modeling procedures, and self-control methods are discussed after reviewing normative and prevalence data regarding children's fears. Research…

Participatory methods in pediatric participatory research: a systematic review.

PubMed

Haijes, Hanneke A; van Thiel, Ghislaine J M W

2016-05-01

Meaningful child participation in medical research is seen as important. In order to facilitate further development of participatory research, we performed a systematic literature study to describe and assess the available knowledge on participatory methods in pediatric research. A search was executed in five databases: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Cochrane. After careful screening of relevant papers, finally 24 documents were included in our analysis. Literature on participatory methods in pediatric research appears generally to be descriptive, whereby high-quality evidence is lacking. Overall, five groups of participatory methods for children could be distinguished: observational, verbal, written, visual, and active methods. The choice for one of these methods should be based on the child's age, on social and demographic characteristics, and on the research objectives. To date, these methods are still solely used for obtaining data, yet they are suitable for conducting meaningful participation. This may result in a successful partnership between children and researchers. Researchers conducting participatory research with children can use this systematic review in order to weigh the current knowledge about the participatory methods presented.

Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy and Dental Plaque: A Systematic Review of the Literature

PubMed Central

Santin, G. C.; Oliveira, D. S. B.; Galo, R.; Borsatto, M. C.; Corona, S. A. M.

2014-01-01

Background. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on the efficacy of antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (PDTa) on cariogenic dental biofilm. Types of Studies Reviewed. Studies in vivo, in vitro, and in situ were included. Articles that did not address PDTa, those that did not involve cariogenic biofilm, those that used microorganisms in the plankton phase, and reviews were excluded. Data extraction and quality assessments were performed independently by two raters using a scale. Results. Two hundred forty articles were retrieved; only seventeen of them met the eligibility criteria and were analyzed in the present review. Considerable variability was found regarding the methodologies and application protocols for antimicrobial PDTa. Two articles reported unfavorable results. Practical Implications. The present systematic review does not allow drawing any concrete conclusions regarding the efficacy of antimicrobial PDTa, although this method seems to be a promising option. PMID:25379545

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. The use of text mining to eliminate studies automatically should be considered promising, but not yet fully proven. In highly technical/clinical areas, it may be used with a high degree of confidence; but more developmental and evaluative work is needed in other disciplines.

Assessing the complexity of interventions within systematic reviews: development, content and use of a new tool (iCAT_SR).

PubMed

Lewin, Simon; Hendry, Maggie; Chandler, Jackie; Oxman, Andrew D; Michie, Susan; Shepperd, Sasha; Reeves, Barnaby C; Tugwell, Peter; Hannes, Karin; Rehfuess, Eva A; Welch, Vivien; Mckenzie, Joanne E; Burford, Belinda; Petkovic, Jennifer; Anderson, Laurie M; Harris, Janet; Noyes, Jane

2017-04-26

Health interventions fall along a spectrum from simple to more complex. There is wide interest in methods for reviewing 'complex interventions', but few transparent approaches for assessing intervention complexity in systematic reviews. Such assessments may assist review authors in, for example, systematically describing interventions and developing logic models. This paper describes the development and application of the intervention Complexity Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews (iCAT_SR), a new tool to assess and categorise levels of intervention complexity in systematic reviews. We developed the iCAT_SR by adapting and extending an existing complexity assessment tool for randomized trials. We undertook this adaptation using a consensus approach in which possible complexity dimensions were circulated for feedback to a panel of methodologists with expertise in complex interventions and systematic reviews. Based on these inputs, we developed a draft version of the tool. We then invited a second round of feedback from the panel and a wider group of systematic reviewers. This informed further refinement of the tool. The tool comprises ten dimensions: (1) the number of active components in the intervention; (2) the number of behaviours of recipients to which the intervention is directed; (3) the range and number of organizational levels targeted by the intervention; (4) the degree of tailoring intended or flexibility permitted across sites or individuals in applying or implementing the intervention; (5) the level of skill required by those delivering the intervention; (6) the level of skill required by those receiving the intervention; (7) the degree of interaction between intervention components; (8) the degree to which the effects of the intervention are context dependent; (9) the degree to which the effects of the interventions are changed by recipient or provider factors; (10) and the nature of the causal pathway between intervention and outcome. Dimensions 1-6 are considered 'core' dimensions. Dimensions 7-10 are optional and may not be useful for all interventions. The iCAT_SR tool facilitates more in-depth, systematic assessment of the complexity of interventions in systematic reviews and can assist in undertaking reviews and interpreting review findings. Further testing of the tool is now needed.

Developing and refining the methods for a 'one-stop shop' for research evidence about health systems.

PubMed

Lavis, John N; Wilson, Michael G; Moat, Kaelan A; Hammill, Amanda C; Boyko, Jennifer A; Grimshaw, Jeremy M; Flottorp, Signe

2015-02-25

Policymakers, stakeholders and researchers have not been able to find research evidence about health systems using an easily understood taxonomy of topics, know when they have conducted a comprehensive search of the many types of research evidence relevant to them, or rapidly identify decision-relevant information in their search results. To address these gaps, we developed an approach to building a 'one-stop shop' for research evidence about health systems. We developed a taxonomy of health system topics and iteratively refined it by drawing on existing categorization schemes and by using it to categorize progressively larger bundles of research evidence. We identified systematic reviews, systematic review protocols, and review-derived products through searches of Medline, hand searches of several databases indexing systematic reviews, hand searches of journals, and continuous scanning of listservs and websites. We developed an approach to providing 'added value' to existing content (e.g., coding systematic reviews according to the countries in which included studies were conducted) and to expanding the types of evidence eligible for inclusion (e.g., economic evaluations and health system descriptions). Lastly, we developed an approach to continuously updating the online one-stop shop in seven supported languages. The taxonomy is organized by governance, financial, and delivery arrangements and by implementation strategies. The 'one-stop shop', called Health Systems Evidence, contains a comprehensive inventory of evidence briefs, overviews of systematic reviews, systematic reviews, systematic review protocols, registered systematic review titles, economic evaluations and costing studies, health reform descriptions and health system descriptions, and many types of added-value coding. It is continuously updated and new content is regularly translated into Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish. Policymakers and stakeholders can now easily access and use a wide variety of types of research evidence about health systems to inform decision-making and advocacy. Researchers and research funding agencies can use Health Systems Evidence to identify gaps in the current stock of research evidence and domains that could benefit from primary research, systematic reviews, and review overviews.

Mindfulness meditation as an intervention for binge eating, emotional eating, and weight loss: a systematic review.

PubMed

Katterman, Shawn N; Kleinman, Brighid M; Hood, Megan M; Nackers, Lisa M; Corsica, Joyce A

2014-04-01

Mindfulness-based approaches are growing in popularity as interventions for disordered eating and weight loss. Initial research suggests that mindfulness meditation may be an effective intervention for binge eating; however, no systematic review has examined interventions where mindfulness meditation was the primary intervention and no review has examined its effect on subclinical disordered eating or weight. Using the PRISMA method for systematic reviews, we reviewed 14 studies that investigated mindfulness meditation as the primary intervention and assessed binge eating, emotional eating, and/or weight change. Results suggest that mindfulness meditation effectively decreases binge eating and emotional eating in populations engaging in this behavior; evidence for its effect on weight is mixed. Additional research is warranted to determine comparative effectiveness and long-term effects of mindfulness training. Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

The Effects of Technology-Assisted Instruction to Improve Phonological-Awareness Skills in Children with Reading Difficulties: A Systematic Review. EBP Briefs. Volume 8, Issue 1

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Lee, Sue Ann S.; Sancibrian, Sherry; Ahlfinger, Nicole

2013-01-01

Clinical Question: For preschool and school-age children with or at risk for reading difficulties, does technology-assisted instruction lead to better phonological-awareness (PA) skills than instruction without technology? Method: Systematic Review Sources: ERIC, PsychInfo, CINAHL, and ASHA journal search Search Terms: phonological awareness,…

Treadmill Training with Partial Body-Weight Support in Children with Cerebral Palsy: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Mutlu, Akmer; Krosschell, Kristin; Spira, Deborah Gaebler

2009-01-01

OKAim: The aim of this systematic review was to examine the literature on the effects of partial body-weight support treadmill training (PBWSTT) in children with cerebral palsy (CP) on functional outcomes and attainment of ambulation. Method: We searched the relevant literature from 1950 to July 2007. We found eight studies on the use of PWSBTT on…

Educational and Skills-Based Interventions for Preventing Relationship and Dating Violence in Adolescents and Young Adults. A Systematic Review. Campbell Systematic Reviews 2013:14

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Fellmeth, Gracia L. T.; Heffernan, Catherine; Nurse, Joanna; Habibula, Shakiba; Sethi, Dinesh

2013-01-01

Background: Educational and skills-based interventions are often used to prevent relationship and dating violence among young people. Objectives: To assess the efficacy of educational and skills-based interventions designed to prevent relationship and dating violence in adolescents and young adults. Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central…

Paradigm War Revived? On the Diagnosis of Resistance to Randomized Controlled Trials and Systematic Review in Education

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hammersley, Martyn

2008-01-01

There has been considerable discussion in recent years about the role in educational research of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews (SR). Advocacy of these methods arose partly as a result of the spread of the notion of evidence-based practice from medicine into other fields, and of the rise of the "new public…

Systematic reviews of complementary therapies – an annotated bibliography. Part 2: Herbal medicine

PubMed Central

Linde, Klaus; ter Riet, Gerben; Hondras, Maria; Vickers, Andrew; Saller, Reinhard; Melchart, Dieter

2001-01-01

Background Complementary therapies are widespread but controversial. We aim to provide a comprehensive collection and a summary of systematic reviews of clinical trials in three major complementary therapies (acupuncture, herbal medicine, homeopathy). This article is dealing with herbal medicine. Potentially relevant reviews were searched through the register of the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field, the Cochrane Library, Medline, and bibliographies of articles and books. To be included articles had to review prospective clinical trials of herbal medicines; had to describe review methods explicitly; had to be published; and had to focus on treatment effects. Information on conditions, interventions, methods, results and conclusions was extracted using a pre-tested form and summarized descriptively. Results From a total of 79 potentially relevant reviews pre-selected in the screening process 58 met the inclusion criteria. Thirty of the reports reviewed ginkgo (for dementia, intermittent claudication, tinnitus, and macular degeneration), hypericum (for depression) or garlic preparations (for cardiovascular risk factors and lower limb atherosclerosis). The quality of primary studies was criticized in the majority of the reviews. Most reviews judged the available evidence as promising but definitive conclusions were rarely possible. Conclusions Systematic reviews are available on a broad range of herbal preparations prescribed for defined conditions. There is very little evidence on the effectiveness of herbalism as practised by specialist herbalists who combine herbs and use unconventional diagnosis. PMID:11518548

Complex systematic review - Perioperative antibiotics in conjunction with dental implant placement.

PubMed

Lund, Bodil; Hultin, Margareta; Tranaeus, Sofia; Naimi-Akbar, Aron; Klinge, Björn

2015-09-01

The aim of this study was to revisit the available scientific literature regarding perioperative antibiotics in conjunction with implant placement by combining the recommended methods for systematic reviews and complex systematic reviews. A search of Medline (OVID), The Cochrane Library (Wiley), EMBASE, PubMed and Health technology assessment (HTA) organizations was performed, in addition to a complementary hand-search. Selected systematic reviews and primary studies were assessed using GRADE and AMSTAR, respectively. A meta-analysis was performed. The literature search identified 846 papers of which 10 primary studies and seven systematic reviews were included. Quality assessment of the systematic reviews revealed two studies of moderate risk of bias and five with high risk of bias. The two systematic reviews of moderate risk of bias stated divergent numbers needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one patient from implant failure. Four of the primary studies comparing antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo were estimated to be of low, or moderate, risk of bias and subjected to meta-analysis. The NNT was 50 (pooled RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18, 0.84; P = 0.02). None of these four studies individually show a statistical significant benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis. Furthermore, narrative analysis of the studies eligible for meta-analysis reveals clinical heterogeneity regarding intervention and smoking. Antibiotic prophylaxis in conjunction with implant placement reduced the risk for implant loss by 2%. However, the sub-analysis of the primary studies suggests that there is no benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis in uncomplicated implant surgery in healthy patient. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Contraceptive use and method choice among women with opioid and other substance use disorders: A systematic review

PubMed Central

Terplan, Mishka; Hand, Dennis J.; Hutchinson, Melissa; Salisbury-Afshar, Elizabeth; Heil, Sarah H.

2016-01-01

Aim To systematically review the literature on contraceptive use by women with opioid and other substance use disorders in order to estimate overall contraceptive use and to examine method choice given the alarmingly high rate of unintended pregnancy in this population. Method Pubmed (1948–2014) and PsycINFO (1806–2014) databases were searched for peer-reviewed journal articles using a systematic search strategy. Only articles published in English and reporting contraceptive use within samples of women with opioid and other substance use disorders were eligible for inclusion. Results Out of 580 abstracts reviewed, 105 articles were given a full-text review, and 24 studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority (51%) of women in these studies reported using opioids, with much smaller percentages reporting alcohol and cocaine use. Across studies, contraceptive prevalence ranged widely, from 6%–77%, with a median of 55%. Results from a small subset of studies (N = 6) suggest that women with opioid and other substance use disorders used contraception less often than non-drug-using comparison populations (56% vs. 81%, respectively). Regarding method choice, condoms were the most prevalent method, accounting for a median of 62% of contraceptives used, while use of more effective methods, especially implants and intrauterine devices (IUDs), was far less prevalent 8%. Conclusions Women with opioid and other substance use disorders have an unmet need for contraception, especially for the most effective methods. Offering contraception services in conjunction with substance use treatment and promoting use of more effective methods could help meet this need and reduce unintended pregnancy in this population. PMID:25900803

The Use of Systematic Reviews and Reporting Guidelines to Advance the Implementation of the 3Rs

PubMed Central

Avey, Marc T; Fenwick, Nicole; Griffin, Gilly

2015-01-01

In 1959, Russell and Burch published The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique, which included concrete advice on factors that they considered would govern progress in the implementation of these principles (enunciated as the 3Rs [Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement in animal-based studies]). One challenge to the implementation of the 3Rs was identified as information retrieval. Here, we further explore this challenge—the need for ‘research on research’—and the role that systematic reviews and reporting guidelines can play in implementation of the 3Rs. First, we examine the 2-fold nature of the challenge of information retrieval: 1) the identification of relevant publications spread throughout a large population of nonrelevant publications and 2) the incomplete reporting of relevant details within those publications. Second, we evaluate how systematic reviews and reporting guidelines can be used generally to address this challenge. Third, we assess the explicit reporting of the 3Rs in a cohort of preclinical animal systematic reviews. Our results show that Reduction methods are the most commonly reported by authors of systematic reviews but that, in general, reporting on how findings relate to the 3Rs is limited at best. Although systematic reviews are excellent tools for resolving the challenge of information retrieval, their utility for making progress in implementation of the 3Rs may be limited unless authors improve their reporting of these principles. PMID:25836961

Developing an evidence-based Guide to Community Preventive Services--methods. The Task Force on Community Preventive Services.

PubMed

Briss, P A; Zaza, S; Pappaioanou, M; Fielding, J; Wright-De Agüero, L; Truman, B I; Hopkins, D P; Mullen, P D; Thompson, R S; Woolf, S H; Carande-Kulis, V G; Anderson, L; Hinman, A R; McQueen, D V; Teutsch, S M; Harris, J R

2000-01-01

Systematic reviews and evidence-based recommendations are increasingly important for decision making in health and medicine. Over the past 20 years, information on the science of synthesizing research results has exploded. However, some approaches to systematic reviews of the effectiveness of clinical preventive services and medical care may be less appropriate for evaluating population-based interventions. Furthermore, methods for linking evidence to recommendations are less well developed than methods for synthesizing evidence. The Guide to Community Preventive Services: Systematic Reviews and Evidence-Based Recommendations (the Guide) will evaluate and make recommendations on population-based and public health interventions. This paper provides an overview of the Guide's process to systematically review evidence and translate that evidence into recommendations. The Guide reviews evidence on effectiveness, the applicability of effectiveness data, (i.e., the extent to which available effectiveness data is thought to apply to additional populations and settings), the intervention's other effects (i.e., important side effects), economic impact, and barriers to implementation of interventions. The steps for obtaining and evaluating evidence into recommendations involve: (1) forming multidisciplinary chapter development teams, (2) developing a conceptual approach to organizing, grouping, selecting and evaluating the interventions in each chapter; (3) selecting interventions to be evaluated; (4) searching for and retrieving evidence; (5) assessing the quality of and summarizing the body of evidence of effectiveness; (6) translating the body of evidence of effectiveness into recommendations; (7) considering information on evidence other than effectiveness; and (8) identifying and summarizing research gaps. Systematic reviews of and evidence-based recommendations for population-health interventions are challenging and methods will continue to evolve. However, using an evidence-based approach to identify and recommend effective interventions directed at specific public health goals may reduce errors in how information is collected and interpreted, identify important gaps in current knowledge thus guiding further research, and enhance the Guide users' ability to assess whether recommendations are valid and prudent from their own perspectives. Over time, all of these advantages could help to increase agreement regarding appropriate community health strategies and help to increase their implementation.

Participant comprehension of research for which they volunteer: a systematic review.

PubMed

Montalvo, Wanda; Larson, Elaine

2014-11-01

Evidence indicates that research participants often do not fully understand the studies for which they have volunteered. The aim of this systematic review was to examine the relationship between the process of obtaining informed consent for research and participant comprehension and satisfaction with the research. Systematic review of published research on informed consent and participant comprehension of research for which they volunteer using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Statement as a guide. PubMed, Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were used to search the literature for studies meeting the following inclusion criteria: (a) published between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2013, (b) interventional or descriptive quantitative design, (c) published in a peer-reviewed journal, (d) written in English, and (e) assessed participant comprehension or satisfaction with the research process. Studies were assessed for quality using seven indicators: sampling method, use of controls or comparison groups, response rate, description of intervention, description of outcome, statistical method, and health literacy assessment. Of 176 studies identified, 27 met inclusion criteria: 13 (48%) were randomized interventional designs and 14 (52%) were descriptive. Three categories of studies included projects assessing (a) enhanced consent process or form, (b) multimedia methods, and (c) education to improve participant understanding. Most (78%) used investigator-developed tools to assess participant comprehension, did not assess participant health literacy (74%), or did not assess the readability level of the consent form (89%). Researchers found participants lacked basic understanding of research elements: randomization, placebo, risks, and therapeutic misconception. Findings indicate (a) inconsistent assessment of participant reading or health literacy level, (b) measurement variation associated with use of nonstandardized tools, and (c) continued therapeutic misconception and lack of understanding among research participants of randomization, placebo, benefit, and risk. While the Agency for Healthcare and Quality and National Quality Forum have published informed consent and authorization toolkits, previously published validated tools are underutilized. Informed consent requires the assessment of health literacy, reading level, and comprehension of research participants using validated assessment tools and methods. © 2014 Sigma Theta Tau International.

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. However, future research should test the generalisability of these findings. PMID:22734117

A Structured Approach Using the Systematic Review Data Repository (SRDR): Building the Evidence for Oral Health Interventions in the Population With Intellectual and Developmental Disability.

PubMed

Bonardi, Alexandra; Clifford, Christine J; Hadar, Nira

2016-08-19

This review describes the methods used for a systematic review of oral health intervention literature in a target population (people with intellectual and developmental disability (I/DD)), which spans a broad range of interventions and study types, conducted with specialized software. The aim of this article is to demonstrate the review strategy, using the free, online systematic review data repository (SRDR) tool, for oral health interventions aimed at reducing disparities between people with I/DD and the general population. Researchers used online title/abstract review (Abstrackr) and data extraction (SRDR) tools to structure the literature review and data extraction. A practicing clinician and an expert methodologist completed the quality review for each study. The data extraction team reported on the experience of using and customizing the SRDR. Using the SRDR, the team developed four extraction templates for eight key questions and completed extraction on 125 articles. This report discusses the advantages and disadvantages of using an electronic tool, such as the SRDR, in completing a systematic review in an area of growing research. This review provides valuable insight for researchers who are considering the use of the SRDR. © The Author(s) 2016.

Functional Assessment-Based Interventions for Students with or At-Risk for High-Incidence Disabilities: Field Testing Single-Case Synthesis Methods

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Common, Eric Alan; Lane, Kathleen Lynne; Pustejovsky, James E.; Johnson, Austin H.; Johl, Liane Elizabeth

2017-01-01

This systematic review investigated one systematic approach to designing, implementing, and evaluating functional assessment-based interventions (FABI) for use in supporting school-age students with or at-risk for high-incidence disabilities. We field tested several recently developed methods for single-case design syntheses. First, we appraised…

Systematic reviews need to consider applicability to disadvantaged populations: inter-rater agreement for a health equity plausibility algorithm.

PubMed

Welch, Vivian; Brand, Kevin; Kristjansson, Elizabeth; Smylie, Janet; Wells, George; Tugwell, Peter

2012-12-19

Systematic reviews have been challenged to consider effects on disadvantaged groups. A priori specification of subgroup analyses is recommended to increase the credibility of these analyses. This study aimed to develop and assess inter-rater agreement for an algorithm for systematic review authors to predict whether differences in effect measures are likely for disadvantaged populations relative to advantaged populations (only relative effect measures were addressed). A health equity plausibility algorithm was developed using clinimetric methods with three items based on literature review, key informant interviews and methodology studies. The three items dealt with the plausibility of differences in relative effects across sex or socioeconomic status (SES) due to: 1) patient characteristics; 2) intervention delivery (i.e., implementation); and 3) comparators. Thirty-five respondents (consisting of clinicians, methodologists and research users) assessed the likelihood of differences across sex and SES for ten systematic reviews with these questions. We assessed inter-rater reliability using Fleiss multi-rater kappa. The proportion agreement was 66% for patient characteristics (95% confidence interval: 61%-71%), 67% for intervention delivery (95% confidence interval: 62% to 72%) and 55% for the comparator (95% confidence interval: 50% to 60%). Inter-rater kappa, assessed with Fleiss kappa, ranged from 0 to 0.199, representing very low agreement beyond chance. Users of systematic reviews rated that important differences in relative effects across sex and socioeconomic status were plausible for a range of individual and population-level interventions. However, there was very low inter-rater agreement for these assessments. There is an unmet need for discussion of plausibility of differential effects in systematic reviews. Increased consideration of external validity and applicability to different populations and settings is warranted in systematic reviews to meet this need.

Association between exogenous testosterone and cardiovascular events: an overview of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Onasanya, Oluwadamilola; Iyer, Geetha; Lucas, Eleanor; Lin, Dora; Singh, Sonal; Alexander, G Caleb

2016-11-01

Given the conflicting evidence regarding the association between exogenous testosterone and cardiovascular events, we systematically assessed published systematic reviews for evidence of the association between exogenous testosterone and cardiovascular events. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Collaboration Clinical Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the US Food and Drug Administration website for systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials published up to July 19, 2016. Two independent reviewers screened 954 full texts from 29 335 abstracts to identify systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials in which the cardiovascular effects of exogenous testosterone on men aged 18 years or older were examined. We extracted data for study characteristics, analytic methods, and key findings, and applied the AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) checklist to assess methodological quality of each review. Our primary outcome measure was the direction and magnitude of association between exogenous testosterone and cardiovascular events. We identified seven reviews and meta-analyses, which had substantial clinical heterogeneity, differing statistical methods, and variable methodological quality and quality of data abstraction. AMSTAR scores ranged from 3 to 9 out of 11. Six systematic reviews that each included a meta-analysis showed no significant association between exogenous testosterone and cardiovascular events, with summary estimates ranging from 1·07 to 1·82 and imprecise confidence intervals. Two of these six meta-analyses showed increased risk in subgroup analyses of oral testosterone and men aged 65 years or older during their first treatment year. One meta-analysis showed a significant association between exogenous testosterone and cardiovascular events, in men aged 18 years or older generally, with a summary estimate of 1·54 (95% CI 1·09-2·18). Our optimal information size analysis showed that any randomised controlled trial aiming to detect a true difference in cardiovascular risk between treatment groups receiving exogenous testosterone and their controls (with a two-sided p value of 0·05 and a power of 80%) would require at least 17 664 participants in each trial group. Therefore, given the challenge of adequately powering clinical trials for rare outcomes, rigorous observational studies are needed to clarify the association between testosterone-replacement therapy and major adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Does classroom-based Crew Resource Management training improve patient safety culture? A systematic review

PubMed Central

de Bruijne, Martine C; Zwijnenberg, Nicolien C; Jansma, Elise P; van Dyck, Cathy; Wagner, Cordula

2014-01-01

Aim: To evaluate the evidence of the effectiveness of classroom-based Crew Resource Management training on safety culture by a systematic review of literature. Methods: Studies were identified in PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and Educational Resources Information Center up to 19 December 2012. The Methods Guide for Comparative Effectiveness Reviews was used to assess the risk of bias in the individual studies. Results: In total, 22 manuscripts were included for review. Training settings, study designs, and evaluation methods varied widely. Most studies reporting only a selection of culture dimensions found mainly positive results, whereas studies reporting all safety culture dimensions of the particular survey found mixed results. On average, studies were at moderate risk of bias. Conclusion: Evidence of the effectiveness of Crew Resource Management training in health care on safety culture is scarce and the validity of most studies is limited. The results underline the necessity of more valid study designs, preferably using triangulation methods. PMID:26770720

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Studies Evaluating Diagnostic Test Accuracy: A Practical Review for Clinical Researchers-Part II. Statistical Methods of Meta-Analysis

PubMed Central

Lee, Juneyoung; Kim, Kyung Won; Choi, Sang Hyun; Huh, Jimi

2015-01-01

Meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies differs from the usual meta-analysis of therapeutic/interventional studies in that, it is required to simultaneously analyze a pair of two outcome measures such as sensitivity and specificity, instead of a single outcome. Since sensitivity and specificity are generally inversely correlated and could be affected by a threshold effect, more sophisticated statistical methods are required for the meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy. Hierarchical models including the bivariate model and the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model are increasingly being accepted as standard methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies. We provide a conceptual review of statistical methods currently used and recommended for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies. This article could serve as a methodological reference for those who perform systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies. PMID:26576107

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 participants included in the Cochrane review). Data were unavailable for two of the RCTs identified. Methodological evaluations embedded in RCTs may be unpublished, published in the grey literature or where published, poorly indexed in bibliographic databases. To identify such studies and minimise selection bias in systematic reviews of methodological evaluations, reviewers should consider contacting CTUs and trial methodologists.

Systematic Reviews of Animal Models: Methodology versus Epistemology

PubMed Central

Greek, Ray; Menache, Andre

2013-01-01

Systematic reviews are currently favored methods of evaluating research in order to reach conclusions regarding medical practice. The need for such reviews is necessitated by the fact that no research is perfect and experts are prone to bias. By combining many studies that fulfill specific criteria, one hopes that the strengths can be multiplied and thus reliable conclusions attained. Potential flaws in this process include the assumptions that underlie the research under examination. If the assumptions, or axioms, upon which the research studies are based, are untenable either scientifically or logically, then the results must be highly suspect regardless of the otherwise high quality of the studies or the systematic reviews. We outline recent criticisms of animal-based research, namely that animal models are failing to predict human responses. It is this failure that is purportedly being corrected via systematic reviews. We then examine the assumption that animal models can predict human outcomes to perturbations such as disease or drugs, even under the best of circumstances. We examine the use of animal models in light of empirical evidence comparing human outcomes to those from animal models, complexity theory, and evolutionary biology. We conclude that even if legitimate criticisms of animal models were addressed, through standardization of protocols and systematic reviews, the animal model would still fail as a predictive modality for human response to drugs and disease. Therefore, systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal-based research are poor tools for attempting to reach conclusions regarding human interventions. PMID:23372426

Effectiveness of preventive and treatment interventions for primary headaches in the workplace: A systematic review of the literature.

PubMed

Lardon, Arnaud; Girard, Marie-Pier; Zaïm, Chérine; Lemeunier, Nadège; Descarreaux, Martin; Marchand, Andrée-Anne

2017-01-01

Aim The purpose of this systematic literature review is to assess the benefits of workplace-based occupational therapies and interventions, including acute and preventive medication, on headache intensity and frequency, related disability as well as work-related outcomes. Methods A search of the literature was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane library, CINAHL and Embase using terms related to headache, workplace and occupational health. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias assessment tool was used on individual studies to assess internal validity and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was applied to studies by clinical outcome and used to rate quality of evidence. Results Fifteen articles were included in the systematic review. None of them were classified as low risk of bias according to the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. This systematic review found preliminary low-quality evidence suggesting that exercise and acupuncture can reduce workers' headache pain intensity, frequency and related disability. Conclusion Although this systematic review provided preliminary low evidence in favour of work-based intervention, studies with more rigorous designs and methodologies are needed to provide further evidence of the effectiveness of workplace-based headache management strategies.

Forty-two systematic reviews generated 23 items for assessing the risk of bias in values and preferences' studies.

PubMed

Yepes-Nuñez, Juan Jose; Zhang, Yuan; Xie, Feng; Alonso-Coello, Pablo; Selva, Anna; Schünemann, Holger; Guyatt, Gordon

2017-05-01

In systematic reviews of studies of patients' values and preferences, the objective of the study was to summarize items and domains authors have identified when considering the risk of bias (RoB) associated with primary studies. We conducted a systematic survey of systematic reviews of patients' values and preference studies. Our search included three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO) from their inception to August 2015. We conducted duplicate data extraction, focusing on items that authors used to address RoB in the primary studies included in their reviews and the associated underlying domains, and summarized criteria in descriptive tables. We identified 42 eligible systematic reviews that addressed 23 items relevant to RoB and grouped the items into 7 domains: appropriate administration of instrument; instrument choice; instrument-described health state presentation; choice of participants group; description, analysis, and presentation of methods and results; patient understanding; and subgroup analysis. The items and domains identified provide insight into issues of RoB in patients' values and preference studies and establish the basis for an instrument to assess RoB in such studies. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Parental experiences of providing skin-to-skin care to their newborn infant—Part 1: A qualitative systematic review

PubMed Central

Anderzén-Carlsson, Agneta; Lamy, Zeni Carvalho; Eriksson, Mats

2014-01-01

Aim To describe parental experiences of providing skin-to-skin care (SSC) to their newborn infants. Background SSC care for newborn infants has been reported to have positive physiological and psychological benefits to the infants and their parents. No systematic review regarding parental experiences has been identified. Design In this first part of a meta-study, the findings of a systematic literature review on parental experience of SSC care are presented. Data sources Four databases were searched, without year or language limitations, up until December 2013. Manual searches were performed in reference lists and in a bibliography of the topic. Review methods After a quality-appraisal process, data from the original articles were extracted and analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results The systematic and manual searches led to the inclusion of 29 original qualitative papers from nine countries, reporting experiences from 401 mothers and 94 fathers. Two themes that characterized the provision of SSC emerged: a restoring experience and an energy-draining experience. Conclusion This review has added scientific and systematic knowledge about parental experiences of providing SSC. Further research about fathers’ experiences is recommended. PMID:25319746

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

The relationships between income inequality, welfare regimes and aggregate health: a systematic review.

PubMed

Kim, Ki-Tae

2017-06-01

: When analysing the relationships between income inequality, welfare regimes and aggregate health at the cross-national level, previous primary articles and systematic reviews reach inconsistent conclusions. Contrary to theoretical expectations, equal societies or the Social Democratic welfare regime do not always have the best aggregate health when compared with those of other relatively unequal societies or other welfare regimes. This article will shed light on the controversial subjects with a new decomposition systematic review method. The decomposition systematic review method breaks down an individual empirical article, if necessary, into multiple findings based on an article's use of the following four components: independent variable, dependent variable, method and dataset. This decomposition method extracts 107 findings from the selected 48 articles, demonstrating the dynamics between the four components. 'The age threshold effect' is recognized over which the hypothesized relations between income inequality, welfare regimes and aggregate health reverse. The hypothesis is supported mainly for younger infant and child health indicators, but not for adult health or general health indicators such as life expectancy. Further three threshold effects (income, gender and period) have also been put forward. The negative relationship between income inequality and aggregate health, often termed as the Wilkinson Hypothesis, was not generally observed in all health indicators except for infant and child mortality. The Scandinavian welfare regime reveals worse-than-expected outcomes in all health indicators except infant and child mortality. © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.

The Use of Wearable Inertial Motion Sensors in Human Lower Limb Biomechanics Studies: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Fong, Daniel Tik-Pui; Chan, Yue-Yan

2010-01-01

Wearable motion sensors consisting of accelerometers, gyroscopes and magnetic sensors are readily available nowadays. The small size and low production costs of motion sensors make them a very good tool for human motions analysis. However, data processing and accuracy of the collected data are important issues for research purposes. In this paper, we aim to review the literature related to usage of inertial sensors in human lower limb biomechanics studies. A systematic search was done in the following search engines: ISI Web of Knowledge, Medline, SportDiscus and IEEE Xplore. Thirty nine full papers and conference abstracts with related topics were included in this review. The type of sensor involved, data collection methods, study design, validation methods and its applications were reviewed. PMID:22163542

The use of wearable inertial motion sensors in human lower limb biomechanics studies: a systematic review.

PubMed

Fong, Daniel Tik-Pui; Chan, Yue-Yan

2010-01-01

Wearable motion sensors consisting of accelerometers, gyroscopes and magnetic sensors are readily available nowadays. The small size and low production costs of motion sensors make them a very good tool for human motions analysis. However, data processing and accuracy of the collected data are important issues for research purposes. In this paper, we aim to review the literature related to usage of inertial sensors in human lower limb biomechanics studies. A systematic search was done in the following search engines: ISI Web of Knowledge, Medline, SportDiscus and IEEE Xplore. Thirty nine full papers and conference abstracts with related topics were included in this review. The type of sensor involved, data collection methods, study design, validation methods and its applications were reviewed.

Issues in the incorporation of economic perspectives and evidence into Cochrane reviews

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Background Methods for systematic reviews of the effects of health interventions have focused mainly on addressing the question of 'What works?’ or 'Is this intervention effective in achieving one or more specific outcomes?’ Addressing the question 'Is it worth it given the resources available?’ has received less attention. This latter question can be addressed by applying an economic lens to the systematic review process. This paper reflects on the value and desire for the consideration by end users for coverage of an economic perspective in a Cochrane review and outlines two potential approaches and future directions. Methods Two frameworks to guide review authors who are seeking to include an economic perspective are outlined. The first involves conducting a full systematic review of economic evaluations that is integrated into a review of intervention effects. The second involves developing a brief economic commentary. The two approaches share a set of common stages but allow the tailoring of the economic component of the Cochrane review to the skills and resources available to the review team. Results The number of studies using the methods outlined in the paper is limited, and further examples are needed both to explore the value of these approaches and to further develop them. The rate of progress will hinge on the organisational leadership, capacity and resources available to the CCEMG, author teams and other Cochrane entities. Particular methodological challenges to overcome relate to understanding the key economic trade-offs and casual relationships for a given decision problem and informing the development of evaluations designed to support local decision-makers. Conclusions Methods for incorporating economic perspectives and evidence into Cochrane intervention reviews are established. Their role is not to provide a precise estimate of 'cost-effectiveness’ but rather to help end-users of Cochrane reviews to determine the implications of the economic components of reviews for their own specific decisions. PMID:24050504

Landslide Susceptibility Statistical Methods: A Critical and Systematic Literature Review

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Mihir, Monika; Malamud, Bruce; Rossi, Mauro; Reichenbach, Paola; Ardizzone, Francesca

2014-05-01

Landslide susceptibility assessment, the subject of this systematic review, is aimed at understanding the spatial probability of slope failures under a set of geomorphological and environmental conditions. It is estimated that about 375 landslides that occur globally each year are fatal, with around 4600 people killed per year. Past studies have brought out the increasing cost of landslide damages which primarily can be attributed to human occupation and increased human activities in the vulnerable environments. Many scientists, to evaluate and reduce landslide risk, have made an effort to efficiently map landslide susceptibility using different statistical methods. In this paper, we do a critical and systematic landslide susceptibility literature review, in terms of the different statistical methods used. For each of a broad set of studies reviewed we note: (i) study geography region and areal extent, (ii) landslide types, (iii) inventory type and temporal period covered, (iv) mapping technique (v) thematic variables used (vi) statistical models, (vii) assessment of model skill, (viii) uncertainty assessment methods, (ix) validation methods. We then pulled out broad trends within our review of landslide susceptibility, particularly regarding the statistical methods. We found that the most common statistical methods used in the study of landslide susceptibility include logistic regression, artificial neural network, discriminant analysis and weight of evidence. Although most of the studies we reviewed assessed the model skill, very few assessed model uncertainty. In terms of geographic extent, the largest number of landslide susceptibility zonations were in Turkey, Korea, Spain, Italy and Malaysia. However, there are also many landslides and fatalities in other localities, particularly India, China, Philippines, Nepal and Indonesia, Guatemala, and Pakistan, where there are much fewer landslide susceptibility studies available in the peer-review literature. This raises some concern that existing studies do not always cover all the regions globally that currently experience landslides and landslide fatalities.

Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake in malnourished or nutritionally at-risk adults: a systematic review of nonrandomised studies.

PubMed

Kimber, K; Gibbs, M; Weekes, C E; Baldwin, C

2015-12-01

Supportive interventions for enhancing dietary intake in malnourished or nutritionally at risk adults are frequently recommended. A recent systematic review of randomised controlled trials identified limited and poor quality evidence to support their use. Observational studies have been shown to compliment and extend their evidence. This review aimed to synthesise evidence from nonrandomised studies aiming to improve nutritional intake in nutritionally vulnerable individuals and to describe their effects on cost, nutritional, clinical and patient centred outcomes. Systematic searches of 10 electronic databases were undertaken to May 2013. Reference lists of identified studies and systematic reviews were scrutinised and hand searching of relevant meeting abstracts was undertaken. Titles and abstracts were reviewed, data extracted by two research-ers working independently and summarised using a structured narrative format. Forty-one studies (n = 3751 participants) were identified for inclusion. Interventions identified included changes to the organisation of nutritional care (n = 15), changes to the feeding environment (n = 11), modification to meals (n = 6), supplementation of meals (n = 7) and recipients of home delivered meals (n = 2). Eighteen of 23 studies reported improvements in nutritional intake; however, effects on nutritional status, clinical outcomes and costs were reported in few studies and findings were inconsistent. Eighteen studies reported patient experience, highlighting benefits to nutritional status most commonly as judged by the carers but the methods used lacked rigour. This systematic review describes a range of interventions that may be implemented in clinical practice. A limited range of outcomes are reported and it is difficult to draw any meaningful conclusions on the effect of the different methods. © 2015 The British Dietetic Association Ltd.

Adverse drug reactions due to drug-drug interactions with proton pump inhibitors: assessment of systematic reviews with AMSTAR method.

PubMed

Yucel, Emre; Sancar, Mesut; Yucel, Aylin; Okuyan, Betul

2016-01-01

Many systematic reviews resulted in claims on drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Such a large number begs for consensus on the clinical significance of findings. We critically evaluated the safety of PPI use with respect to DDIs with a meta-review of systematic reviews published between 1978 and 2015. We assessed the evidence by their reliability, repeatability, transparency, and objectivity according to the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) criteria. Clinicians must assess risks for each PPI for certain comorbid conditions. DDIs don't substantiate class effect for PPIs; each PPI could induce unique DDIs. Concomitant use of PPIs with thienopyridines (e.g. clopidogrel) could be justified in patients without strong affinity to cytochrome CYP2C19 and with high risk of bleeding (e.g. patients with prior upper gastrointestinal bleeding, Helicobacter pylori infection, advanced age, steroid treatment, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use). DDIs could occur in an AIDS subpopulation treated with highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). DDIs exist for cancer patients undergoing targeted therapy. Hypomagnesemia could increase in the setting of advanced age and polypharmacy. Omeprazole poses high risks owing to its pharmacokinetic DDI profile. Future systematic reviews should incorporate these additional risks for better clinical guidance.

Music Appreciation after Cochlear Implantation in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Riley, Phoebe E; Ruhl, Douglas S; Camacho, Macario; Tolisano, Anthony M

2018-06-01

Objective The cochlear implant (CI) improves quality of life for people who are severely and profoundly deafened, allowing implantees to perceive speech at levels similar to those of individuals with normal hearing. However, patients with CIs generally report a reduced appreciation of music after implantation. We aimed to systematically review the English-language literature for studies evaluating music enjoyment and perception among adult patients with CIs. Data Sources A systematic review of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Review Methods The PRISMA statement was utilized to identify English-language studies reporting music appreciation among adults with CIs. Two independent reviewers performed searches through May 2017. Included studies investigated parameters related to music enjoyment and music perception, including (1) pitch and timbre perception, (2) noise-canceling algorithms, and (3) the presence of dissonant chords, lyrics, or visual cues. Results A total of 508 articles were screened for relevance. Forty-one full-text articles were evaluated, and 18 met final inclusion criteria. Studies used heterogeneous methods of outcome measurement for identifying music appreciation. The outcome measures suggest that rhythm and lyrics are important components of enjoyment. Patients with CIs had difficulty with pitch and timbre perception. Conclusion The heterogeneous outcome measures identified in this systematic review suggest that rhythm and lyrics are important components of enjoyment, while patients with CIs had difficulty with pitch and timbre perception. Because there is no standardized reporting metric for music appreciation among adult patients with CIs, a standardized validated outcome-measuring tool is warranted.

Chinese herbal medicine and depression: the research evidence.

PubMed

Butler, Lee; Pilkington, Karen

2013-01-01

Background. Alternative approaches for managing depression are often sought and herbal mixtures are widely used in China. The aim of this paper was to provide an overall picture of the current evidence by analysing published systematic reviews and presenting a supplementary systematic review of trials in Western databases. Methods. Searches were conducted using AMED, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed, PsycINFO, and trial registers. Results were screened and selected trials were evaluated by two reviewers working independently. Systematic reviews were identified and assessed using key criteria. Results. Five systematic reviews were located addressing the Chinese literature, adjunctive use of Chinese herbs, and the formulae Chaihu-Shugan-San, Xiao Yao San, and Free and Easy Wanderer Plus. The supplementary review located 8 trials, 3 of which were not included in previous reviews. Positive results were reported: no significant differences from medication, greater effect than medication or placebo, reduced adverse event rates when combined or compared with antidepressants. However, limitations in methodology and reporting were revealed. Conclusions. Despite promising results, particularly for Xiao Yao San and its modifications, the effectiveness of Chinese herbal medicine in depression could not be fully substantiated based on current evidence. Further well-designed, well-reported trials that reflect practice may be worth pursuing.

Effects of Pilates exercise programs in people with chronic low back pain: a systematic review.

PubMed

Patti, Antonino; Bianco, Antonino; Paoli, Antonio; Messina, Giuseppe; Montalto, Maria Alessandra; Bellafiore, Marianna; Battaglia, Giuseppe; Iovane, Angelo; Palma, Antonio

2015-01-01

The Pilates method has recently become a fast-growing popular way of exercise recommended for healthy individuals and those engaged in rehabilitation. Several published studies have examined the effects of Pilates method in people with chronic low back pain (LBP). The objective of this study is to describe and provide an extensive overview of the scientific literature comparing the effectiveness of the Pilates method on pain and disability in patients with chronic nonspecific LBP. The study is based on the data from the following sources: MEDLINE-NLM, MEDLINE-EBSCO, Scopus Elsevier, Cochrane, DOAJ, SciELO, and PLOSONE. Original articles and systematic reviews of adults with chronic nonspecific LBP that evaluated pain and/or disability were included in this study; studies in which the primary treatment was based on Pilates method exercises compared with no treatment, minimal intervention, other types of intervention, or other types of exercises. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) were adopted. The literature search included 7 electronic databases and the reference list of relevant systematic reviews and original articles to July 2014. Two independent investigators conducted the literature search and performed the synthesis as follows: Study Design; Sample (n); Disability measure; Intervention; and Main results. The searches identified a total of 128 articles. From these, 29 were considered eligible and were included in the analysis. The items were stratified as follows: Pilates method versus other kind of exercises (n = 6 trials) and Pilates method versus no treatment group or minimal intervention for short-term pain (n = 9 trials); the therapeutic effect of the Pilates method in randomized cohorts (n = 5); and analysis of reviews (n = 9). We found that there is a dearth of studies that clearly demonstrates the efficacy of a specific Pilates exercise program over another in the treatment of chronic pain. However, the consensus in the field suggests that Pilates method is more effective than minimal physical exercise intervention in reducing pain. These conclusions need to be supported by other proper investigations.

The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses

PubMed Central

2016-01-01

Policy Points: Currently, there is massive production of unnecessary, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta‐analyses. Instead of promoting evidence‐based medicine and health care, these instruments often serve mostly as easily produced publishable units or marketing tools.Suboptimal systematic reviews and meta‐analyses can be harmful given the major prestige and influence these types of studies have acquired.The publication of systematic reviews and meta‐analyses should be realigned to remove biases and vested interests and to integrate them better with the primary production of evidence. Context Currently, most systematic reviews and meta‐analyses are done retrospectively with fragmented published information. This article aims to explore the growth of published systematic reviews and meta‐analyses and to estimate how often they are redundant, misleading, or serving conflicted interests. Methods Data included information from PubMed surveys and from empirical evaluations of meta‐analyses. Findings Publication of systematic reviews and meta‐analyses has increased rapidly. In the period January 1, 1986, to December 4, 2015, PubMed tags 266,782 items as “systematic reviews” and 58,611 as “meta‐analyses.” Annual publications between 1991 and 2014 increased 2,728% for systematic reviews and 2,635% for meta‐analyses versus only 153% for all PubMed‐indexed items. Currently, probably more systematic reviews of trials than new randomized trials are published annually. Most topics addressed by meta‐analyses of randomized trials have overlapping, redundant meta‐analyses; same‐topic meta‐analyses may exceed 20 sometimes. Some fields produce massive numbers of meta‐analyses; for example, 185 meta‐analyses of antidepressants for depression were published between 2007 and 2014. These meta‐analyses are often produced either by industry employees or by authors with industry ties and results are aligned with sponsor interests. China has rapidly become the most prolific producer of English‐language, PubMed‐indexed meta‐analyses. The most massive presence of Chinese meta‐analyses is on genetic associations (63% of global production in 2014), where almost all results are misleading since they combine fragmented information from mostly abandoned era of candidate genes. Furthermore, many contracting companies working on evidence synthesis receive industry contracts to produce meta‐analyses, many of which probably remain unpublished. Many other meta‐analyses have serious flaws. Of the remaining, most have weak or insufficient evidence to inform decision making. Few systematic reviews and meta‐analyses are both non‐misleading and useful. Conclusions The production of systematic reviews and meta‐analyses has reached epidemic proportions. Possibly, the large majority of produced systematic reviews and meta‐analyses are unnecessary, misleading, and/or conflicted. PMID:27620683

e-Learning in Surgical Education: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Jayakumar, Nithish; Brunckhorst, Oliver; Dasgupta, Prokar; Khan, Muhammad Shamim; Ahmed, Kamran

2015-01-01

e-Learning involves the delivery of educational content through web-based methods. Owing to work-hour restrictions and changing practice patterns in surgery, e-learning can offer an effective alternative to traditional teaching. Our aims were to (1) identify current modalities of e-learning, (2) assess the efficacy of e-learning as an intervention in surgical education through a systematic review of the literature, and (3) discuss the relevance of e-learning as an educational tool in surgical education. This is the first such systematic review in this field. A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted for relevant articles published until July 2014, using a predefined search strategy. The database search was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A total of 38 articles were found which met the inclusion criteria. In these studies, e-learning was used as an intervention in 3 different ways: (1) to teach cases through virtual patients (18/38); (2) to teach theoretical knowledge through online tutorials, or other means (18/38); and (3) to teach surgical skills (2/38). Nearly all of the studies reviewed report significant knowledge gain from e-learning; however, 2 in 3 studies did not use a control group. e-Learning has emerged as an effective mode of teaching with particular relevance for surgical education today. Published studies have demonstrated the efficacy of this method; however, future work must involve well-designed randomized controlled trials comparing e-learning against standard teaching. Copyright © 2015 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Developing and Applying a Protocol for a Systematic Review in the Social Sciences

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Campbell, Allison; Taylor, Brian; Bates, Jessica; O'Connor-Bones, Una

2018-01-01

The article reports on a systematic method of undertaking a literature search on the educational impact of being a young carer (16-24 years old). The search methodology applied and described in detail will be of value to academic librarians and to other education researchers who undertake systematic literature searches. Seven bibliographic…

Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series-paper 5: methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews.

PubMed

Harden, Angela; Thomas, James; Cargo, Margaret; Harris, Janet; Pantoja, Tomas; Flemming, Kate; Booth, Andrew; Garside, Ruth; Hannes, Karin; Noyes, Jane

2018-05-01

The Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group develops and publishes guidance on the synthesis of qualitative and mixed-method evidence from process evaluations. Despite a proliferation of methods for the synthesis of qualitative research, less attention has focused on how to integrate these syntheses within intervention effectiveness reviews. In this article, we report updated guidance from the group on approaches, methods, and tools, which can be used to integrate the findings from quantitative studies evaluating intervention effectiveness with those from qualitative studies and process evaluations. We draw on conceptual analyses of mixed methods systematic review designs and the range of methods and tools that have been used in published reviews that have successfully integrated different types of evidence. We outline five key methods and tools as devices for integration which vary in terms of the levels at which integration takes place; the specialist skills and expertise required within the review team; and their appropriateness in the context of limited evidence. In situations where the requirement is the integration of qualitative and process evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews, we recommend the use of a sequential approach. Here, evidence from each tradition is synthesized separately using methods consistent with each tradition before integration takes place using a common framework. Reviews which integrate qualitative and process evaluation evidence alongside quantitative evidence on intervention effectiveness in a systematic way are rare. This guidance aims to support review teams to achieve integration and we encourage further development through reflection and formal testing. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Mapping Systematic Reviews on Atopic Eczema—An Essential Resource for Dermatology Professionals and Researchers

PubMed Central

Futamura, Masaki; Thomas, Kim S.; Grindlay, Douglas J. C.; Doney, Elizabeth J.; Torley, Donna; Williams, Hywel C.

2013-01-01

Background Many research studies have been published on atopic eczema and these are often summarised in systematic reviews (SRs). Identifying SRs can be time-consuming for health professionals, and researchers. In order to facilitate the identification of important research, we have compiled an on-line resource that includes all relevant eczema reviews published since 2000. Methods SRs were searched for in MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PubMed, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, DARE and NHS Evidence. Selected SRs were assessed against the pre-defined eligibility criteria and relevant articles were grouped by treatment category for the included interventions. All identified systematic reviews are included in the Global Resource of EczemA Trials (GREAT) database (www.greatdatabase.org.uk) and key clinical messages are summarised here. Results A total of 128 SRs reviews were identified, including three clinical guidelines. Of these, 46 (36%) were found in the Cochrane Library. No single database contained all of the SRs found. The number of SRs published per year has increased substantially over the last thirteen years, and reviews were published in a variety of clinical journals. Of the 128 SRs, 1 (1%) was on mechanism, 37 (29%) were on epidemiology, 40 (31%) were on eczema prevention, 29 (23%) were on topical treatments, 31 (24%) were on systemic treatments, and 24 (19%) were on other treatments. All SRs included searches of MEDLINE in their search methods. One hundred six SRs (83%) searched more than one electronic database. There were no language restrictions reported in the search methods of 52 of the SRs (41%). Conclusions This mapping of atopic eczema reviews is a valuable resource. It will help healthcare practitioners, guideline writers, information specialists, and researchers to quickly identify relevant up-to-date evidence in the field for improving patient care. PMID:23505516

Synthesising quantitative and qualitative research in evidence‐based patient information

PubMed Central

Goldsmith, Megan R; Bankhead, Clare R; Austoker, Joan

2007-01-01

Background Systematic reviews have, in the past, focused on quantitative studies and clinical effectiveness, while excluding qualitative evidence. Qualitative research can inform evidence‐based practice independently of other research methodologies but methods for the synthesis of such data are currently evolving. Synthesising quantitative and qualitative research in a single review is an important methodological challenge. Aims This paper describes the review methods developed and the difficulties encountered during the process of updating a systematic review of evidence to inform guidelines for the content of patient information related to cervical screening. Methods Systematic searches of 12 electronic databases (January 1996 to July 2004) were conducted. Studies that evaluated the content of information provided to women about cervical screening or that addressed women's information needs were assessed for inclusion. A data extraction form and quality assessment criteria were developed from published resources. A non‐quantitative synthesis was conducted and a tabular evidence profile for each important outcome (eg “explain what the test involves”) was prepared. The overall quality of evidence for each outcome was then assessed using an approach published by the GRADE working group, which was adapted to suit the review questions and modified to include qualitative research evidence. Quantitative and qualitative studies were considered separately for every outcome. Results 32 papers were included in the systematic review following data extraction and assessment of methodological quality. The review questions were best answered by evidence from a range of data sources. The inclusion of qualitative research, which was often highly relevant and specific to many components of the screening information materials, enabled the production of a set of recommendations that will directly affect policy within the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. Conclusions A practical example is provided of how quantitative and qualitative data sources might successfully be brought together and considered in one review. PMID:17325406

Weight Gain and Metabolic Effects of Mood Stabilizers and Antipsychotics in Pediatric Bipolar Disorder: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Short-Term Trials

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Correll, Christoph U.

2007-01-01

Objective: To review weight and metabolic effects of mood-stabilizing treatments in pediatric bipolar disorder. Method: Systematic PubMed/Medline search of studies reporting on change in weight and/or glucose/lipid values with mood-stabilizing drugs in at least nine pediatric patients with bipolar disorder. Results: Nineteen studies, including 24…

Effectiveness of Mechanisms and Models of Coordination between Organizations, Agencies and Bodies Providing or Financing Health Services in Humanitarian Crises: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Akl, Elie A; El-Jardali, Fadi; Bou Karroum, Lama; El-Eid, Jamale; Brax, Hneine; Akik, Chaza; Osman, Mona; Hassan, Ghayda; Itani, Mira; Farha, Aida; Pottie, Kevin; Oliver, Sandy

2015-01-01

Effective coordination between organizations, agencies and bodies providing or financing health services in humanitarian crises is required to ensure efficiency of services, avoid duplication, and improve equity. The objective of this review was to assess how, during and after humanitarian crises, different mechanisms and models of coordination between organizations, agencies and bodies providing or financing health services compare in terms of access to health services and health outcomes. We registered a protocol for this review in PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews under number PROSPERO2014:CRD42014009267. Eligible studies included randomized and nonrandomized designs, process evaluations and qualitative methods. We electronically searched Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the WHO Global Health Library and websites of relevant organizations. We followed standard systematic review methodology for the selection, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment. We assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. Of 14,309 identified citations from databases and organizations' websites, we identified four eligible studies. Two studies used mixed-methods, one used quantitative methods, and one used qualitative methods. The available evidence suggests that information coordination between bodies providing health services in humanitarian crises settings may be effective in improving health systems inputs. There is additional evidence suggesting that management/directive coordination such as the cluster model may improve health system inputs in addition to access to health services. None of the included studies assessed coordination through common representation and framework coordination. The evidence was judged to be of very low quality. This systematic review provides evidence of possible effectiveness of information coordination and management/directive coordination between organizations, agencies and bodies providing or financing health services in humanitarian crises. Our findings can inform the research agenda and highlight the need for improving conduct and reporting of research in this field.

Protocol for a systematic review and economic evaluation of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of non-hospital-based non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with stable end-stage COPD with hypercapnic respiratory failure.

PubMed

Dave, Chirag; Turner, Alice; Dretzke, Janine; Bayliss, Sue; O'Brien, Deirdre; Jowett, Sue; Moore, David

2014-03-27

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a significant public health burden. Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is a method of supported breathing used as standard care for acutely unwell patients in hospital with COPD, but there is uncertainty around the potential benefits of using NIV in the treatment of stable patients in a non-hospital setting. This is a protocol for systematic reviews of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of NIV in this context, being undertaken in support of a model based economic evaluation. Standard systematic review methods aimed at minimising bias will be employed for study identification, selection and data extraction for both the clinical and economic systematic reviews. Bibliographic databases (for example MEDLINE, EMBASE) and ongoing trials registers will be searched from 1980 onwards. The search strategy will combine terms for the population with those for the intervention. Studies will be selected for review if the population includes adult patients with COPD and hypercapnic respiratory failure, however defined. Systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials and observational studies (with n >1) will be included, and quality assessment will be tailored to the different study designs. The primary outcome measures of interest are survival, quality of life, and healthcare utilisations (hospitalisation and Accident and Emergency attendances). Meta-analyses will be undertaken where clinical and methodological homogeneity exists, supported by predefined subgroup analyses where appropriate. A systematic review of the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of non-hospital NIV will be completed, and a model-based cost-utility analysis undertaken to determine the cost-effectiveness of non-hospital-based NIV compared with standard care. These reviews will attempt to clarify the clinical effectiveness of non-hospital NIV in COPD patients as well as the cost-effectiveness. The findings may indicate whether NIV in a non-hospital setting should be considered more routinely in this patient group, and what the likely cost implications will be. 2012:CRD42012003286.

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 researchers to identify further potential avenues of investigation, and to provide methods for the evaluation and interpretation of dynamic and static images. The publication and registration of this review with PROSPERO provides transparency and accountability, and facilitates the appraisal of the proposed systematic review against the original design. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013003751.

Implementation outcome assessment instruments used in physical healthcare settings and their measurement properties: a systematic review protocol

PubMed Central

Vitoratou, Silia; Sevdalis, Nick; Hull, Louise

2017-01-01

Introduction Over the past 10 years, research into methods that promote the uptake, implementation and sustainability of evidence-based interventions has gathered pace. However, implementation outcomes are defined in different ways and assessed by different measures; the extent to which these measures are valid and reliable is unknown. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and appraise studies that assess the measurement properties of quantitative implementation outcome instruments used in physical healthcare settings, to advance the use of precise and accurate measures. Methods and analysis The following databases will be searched from inception to March 2017: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library. Grey literature will be sought via HMIC, OpenGrey, ProQuest for theses and Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science. Reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews will be hand searched. Three search strings will be combined to identify eligible studies: (1) implementation literature, (2) implementation outcomes and (3) measurement properties. Screening of titles, abstracts and full papers will be assessed for eligibility by two reviewers independently and any discrepancies resolved via consensus with the wider team. The methodological quality of the studies will be assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist. A set of bespoke criteria to determine the quality of the instruments will be used, and the relationship between instrument usability and quality will be explored. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not necessary for systematic review protocols. Researchers and healthcare professionals can use the findings of this systematic review to guide the selection of implementation outcomes instruments, based on their psychometric quality, to assess the impact of their implementation efforts. The findings will also provide a useful guide for reviewers of papers and grants to determine the psychometric quality of the measures used in implementation research. Trial registration number International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO): CRD42017065348. PMID:28993392

Relationship of salivary and plasma cortisol levels in preterm infants: results of a prospective observational study and systematic review of the literature.

PubMed

Maas, Christoph; Ringwald, Christine; Weber, Karin; Engel, Corinna; Poets, Christian F; Binder, Gerhard; Bassler, Dirk

2014-01-01

(1) To investigate the relationship of salivary and plasma cortisol levels in preterm infants with a focus on the usability of salivary cortisol in diagnostic work-up of infants at risk of adrenal insufficiency. (2) To perform a systematic review addressing this question. Clinical study: We conducted a prospective observational single-center study in preterm infants. We analyzed plasma and saliva cortisol concentrations by enzyme immunoassay. Correlation analysis was used to determine the relation between salivary and plasma cortisol levels and the agreement of the measurement methods was analyzed according to Bland-Altman. Systematic review: A systematic literature search (PubMed and Embase) on the relationship of salivary and plasma cortisol levels in neonates was performed in November 2012. Clinical study: We enrolled 58 preterm infants (median (interquartile range) gestational age at birth was 31.4 (28.1-32.7) weeks, birth weight 1,340 (974-1,745) g, respectively). Correlation analyses revealed a relationship of plasma cortisol and salivary cortisol levels. Rank correlation coefficient was 0.6. Estimating plasma cortisol levels based on measured salivary cortisol levels showed poor agreement of the two methods for determining plasma cortisol levels (direct and via salivary cortisol). Sensitivity and specificity of salivary cortisol for the detection of adrenal insufficiency were 0.66 and 0.62, respectively. Systematic review: Six studies in preterm infants and term neonates depicting the correlation of salivary and plasma cortisol were identified with a range of saliva-plasma correlation coefficients from 0.44 to 0.83. Substitution of plasma cortisol by salivary cortisol determination cannot be recommended in preterm infants because of unsatisfactory agreement between methods.

Amateur boxing and risk of chronic traumatic brain injury: systematic review of observational studies

PubMed Central

Knowles, Charles H; Whyte, Greg P

2007-01-01

Objective To evaluate the risk of chronic traumatic brain injury from amateur boxing. Setting Secondary research performed by combination of sport physicians and clinical academics. Design, data sources, and methods Systematic review of observational studies in which chronic traumatic brain injury was defined as any abnormality on clinical neurological examination, psychometric testing, neuroimaging studies, and electroencephalography. Studies were identified through database (1950 to date) and bibliographic searches without language restrictions. Two reviewers extracted study characteristics, quality, and data, with adherence to a protocol developed from a widely recommended method for systematic review of observational studies (MOOSE). Results 36 papers had relevant extractable data (from a detailed evaluation of 93 studies of 943 identified from the initial search). Quality of evidence was generally poor. The best quality studies were those with a cohort design and those that used psychometric tests. These yielded the most negative results: only four of 17 (24%) better quality studies found any indication of chronic traumatic brain injury in a minority of boxers studied. Conclusion There is no strong evidence to associate chronic traumatic brain injury with amateur boxing. PMID:17916811

Amateur boxing and risk of chronic traumatic brain injury: systematic review of observational studies.

PubMed

Loosemore, Mike; Knowles, Charles H; Whyte, Greg P

2007-10-20

To evaluate the risk of chronic traumatic brain injury from amateur boxing. Secondary research performed by combination of sport physicians and clinical academics. DESIGN, DATA SOURCES, AND METHODS: Systematic review of observational studies in which chronic traumatic brain injury was defined as any abnormality on clinical neurological examination, psychometric testing, neuroimaging studies, and electroencephalography. Studies were identified through database (1950 to date) and bibliographic searches without language restrictions. Two reviewers extracted study characteristics, quality, and data, with adherence to a protocol developed from a widely recommended method for systematic review of observational studies (MOOSE). 36 papers had relevant extractable data (from a detailed evaluation of 93 studies of 943 identified from the initial search). Quality of evidence was generally poor. The best quality studies were those with a cohort design and those that used psychometric tests. These yielded the most negative results: only four of 17 (24%) better quality studies found any indication of chronic traumatic brain injury in a minority of boxers studied. There is no strong evidence to associate chronic traumatic brain injury with amateur boxing.

Micro-costing studies in the health and medical literature: protocol for a systematic review

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background Micro-costing is a cost estimation method that allows for precise assessment of the economic costs of health interventions. It has been demonstrated to be particularly useful for estimating the costs of new interventions, for interventions with large variability across providers, and for estimating the true costs to the health system and to society. However, existing guidelines for economic evaluations do not provide sufficient detail of the methods and techniques to use when conducting micro-costing analyses. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to review the current literature on micro-costing studies of health and medical interventions, strategies, and programs to assess the variation in micro-costing methodology and the quality of existing studies. This will inform current practice in conducting and reporting micro-costing studies and lead to greater standardization in methodology in the future. Methods/Design We will perform a systematic review of the current literature on micro-costing studies of health and medical interventions, strategies, and programs. Using rigorously designed search strategies, we will search Ovid MEDLINE, EconLit, BIOSIS Previews, Embase, Scopus, and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) to identify relevant English-language articles. These searches will be supplemented by a review of the references of relevant articles identified. Two members of the review team will independently extract detailed information on the design and characteristics of each included article using a standardized data collection form. A third reviewer will be consulted to resolve discrepancies. We will use checklists that have been developed for critical appraisal of health economics studies to evaluate the quality and potential risk of bias of included studies. Discussion This systematic review will provide useful information to help standardize the methods and techniques for conducting and reporting micro-costing studies in research, which can improve the quality and transparency of future studies and enhance comparability and interpretation of findings. In the long run, these efforts will facilitate clinical and health policy decision-making about resource allocation. Trial registration Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42014007453. PMID:24887208

Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews in Subfertility: A Comparison of Two Different Approaches

PubMed Central

Popovich, Ivor; Windsor, Bethany; Jordan, Vanessa; Showell, Marian; Shea, Bev; Farquhar, Cynthia M.

2012-01-01

Background Systematic reviews are used widely to guide health care decisions. Several tools have been created to assess systematic review quality. The measurement tool for assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews known as the AMSTAR tool applies a yes/no score to eleven relevant domains of review methodology. This tool has been reworked so that each domain is scored based on a four point scale, producing R-AMSTAR. Methods and Findings We aimed to compare the AMSTAR and R-AMSTAR tools in assessing systematic reviews in the field of assisted reproduction for subfertility. All published systematic reviews on assisted reproductive technology, with the latest search for studies taking place from 2007–2011, were considered. Reviews that contained no included studies or considered diagnostic outcomes were excluded. Thirty each of Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews were randomly selected from a search of relevant databases. Both tools were then applied to all sixty reviews. The results were converted to percentage scores and all reviews graded and ranked based on this. AMSTAR produced a much wider variation in percentage scores and achieved higher inter-rater reliability than R-AMSTAR according to kappa statistics. The average rating for Cochrane reviews was consistent between the two tools (88.3% for R-AMSTAR versus 83.6% for AMSTAR) but inconsistent for non-Cochrane reviews (63.9% R-AMSTAR vs. 38.5% AMSTAR). In comparing the rankings generated between the two tools Cochrane reviews changed an average of 4.2 places, compared to 2.9 for non-Cochrane. Conclusion R-AMSTAR provided greater guidance in the assessment of domains and produced quantitative results. However, there were many problems with the construction of its criteria and AMSTAR was much easier to apply consistently. We recommend that AMSTAR incorporates the findings of this study and produces additional guidance for its application in order to improve its reliability and usefulness. PMID:23300526

Systematic Review Protocol to Assess the Effectiveness of Usability Questionnaires in mHealth App Studies

PubMed Central

Bao, Jie; Parmanto, Bambang

2017-01-01

Background Usability questionnaires have a wide use in mobile health (mHealth) app usability studies. However, no systematic review has been conducted for assessing the effectiveness of these questionnaires. Objective This paper describes a protocol for conducting a systematic review of published questionnaire-based mHealth app usability studies. Methods In this systematic review, we will select recently published (2008-2017) articles from peer-reviewed journals and conferences that describe mHealth app usability studies and implement at least one usability questionnaire. The search strategy will include terms such as “mobile app” and “usability.” Multiple databases such as PubMed, CINAHL, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, and INSPEC will be searched. There will be 2 independent reviewers in charge of screening titles and abstracts as well as determining those articles that should be included for a full-text review. The third reviewer will act as a mediator between the other 2 reviewers. Moreover, a data extraction form will be created and used during the full article data analysis. Notably, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines will be followed in reporting this protocol. Results A preliminary search produced 1271 articles, 40 of which are duplicate records. The inclusion-exclusion criteria are being strictly followed in performing the ongoing study selection. Conclusions Usability questionnaires are an important tool in mHealth app usability studies. This review will summarize the usability questionnaires used in published research articles while assessing the efficacy of these questionnaires in determining the usability of mHealth apps. PMID:28765101

Review of systematic reviews on acute procedural pain in children in the hospital setting

PubMed Central

Stinson, Jennifer; Yamada, Janet; Dickson, Alison; Lamba, Jasmine; Stevens, Bonnie

2008-01-01

BACKGROUND: Acute pain is a common experience for hospitalized children. Despite mounting research on treatments for acute procedure-related pain, it remains inadequately treated. OBJECTIVE: To critically appraise all systematic reviews on the effectiveness of acute procedure-related pain management in hospitalized children. METHODS: Published systematic reviews and meta-analyses on pharmacological and nonpharmacological management of acute procedure-related pain in hospitalized children aged one to 18 years were evaluated. Electronic searches were conducted in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and PsycINFO. Two reviewers independently selected articles for review and assessed their quality using a validated seven-point quality assessment measure. Any disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. RESULTS: Of 1469 published articles on interventions for acute pain in hospitalized children, eight systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. However, only five of these reviews were of high quality. Critical appraisal of pharmacological pain interventions indicated that amethocaine was superior to EMLA (AstraZeneca Canada Inc) for reducing needle pain. Distraction and hypnosis were nonpharmacological interventions effective for management of acute procedure-related pain in hospitalized children. CONCLUSIONS: There is growing evidence of rigorous evaluations of both pharmacological and nonpharmacological strategies for acute procedure-related pain in children; however, the evidence underlying some commonly used strategies is limited. The present review will enable the creation of a future research plan to facilitate clinical decision making and to develop clinical policy for managing acute procedure-related pain in children. PMID:18301816

Health-related quality of life of young people and adults with primary or recurrent episodes of genital herpes: a mixed methods systematic review protocol.

PubMed

Bennett, Clare; Rebafka, Anne; Carrier, Judith; Edwards, Deborah; Jones, Jonathan

2018-05-01

The review questions are:The specific objectives are:This mixed methods review seeks to develop an aggregated synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data on the HRQOL implications of genital herpes for the individual in order to derive conclusions and recommendations for clinical practice and policy decision making.

Systematic Review of Economic Models Used to Compare Techniques for Detecting Peripheral Arterial Disease.

PubMed

Moloney, Eoin; O'Connor, Joanne; Craig, Dawn; Robalino, Shannon; Chrysos, Alexandros; Javanbakht, Mehdi; Sims, Andrew; Stansby, Gerard; Wilkes, Scott; Allen, John

2018-04-23

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is a common condition, in which atherosclerotic narrowing in the arteries restricts blood supply to the leg muscles. In order to support future model-based economic evaluations comparing methods of diagnosis in this area, a systematic review of economic modelling studies was conducted. A systematic literature review was performed in June 2017 to identify model-based economic evaluations of diagnostic tests to detect PAD, with six individual databases searched. The review was conducted in accordance with the methods outlined in the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination's guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare, and appropriate inclusion criteria were applied. Relevant data were extracted, and studies were quality assessed. Seven studies were included in the final review, all of which were published between 1995 and 2014. There was wide variation in the types of diagnostic test compared. The majority of the studies (six of seven) referenced the sources used to develop their model, and all studies stated and justified the structural assumptions. Reporting of the data within the included studies could have been improved. Only one identified study focused on the cost-effectiveness of a test typically used in primary care. This review brings together all applied modelling methods for tests used in the diagnosis of PAD, which could be used to support future model-based economic evaluations in this field. The limited modelling work available on tests typically used for the detection of PAD in primary care, in particular, highlights the importance of future work in this area.

Reporting of financial and non-financial conflicts of interest by authors of systematic reviews: a methodological survey

PubMed Central

Anouti, Sirine; Al-Gibbawi, Mounir; Abou-Jaoude, Elias A; Hasbani, Divina Justina; Guyatt, Gordon; Akl, Elie A

2016-01-01

Background Conflicts of interest may bias the findings of systematic reviews. The objective of this methodological survey was to assess the frequency and different types of conflicts of interest that authors of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews report. Methods We searched for systematic reviews using the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Ovid MEDLINE (limited to the 119 Core Clinical Journals and the year 2015). We defined a conflict of interest disclosure as the reporting of whether a conflict of interest exists or not, and used a framework to classify conflicts of interest into individual (financial, professional and intellectual) and institutional (financial and advocatory) conflicts of interest. We conducted descriptive and regression analyses. Results Of the 200 systematic reviews, 194 (97%) reported authors' conflicts of interest disclosures, typically in the main document, and in a few cases either online (2%) or on request (5%). Of the 194 Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews, 49% and 33%, respectively, had at least one author reporting any type of conflict of interest (p=0.023). Institutional conflicts of interest were less frequently reported than individual conflicts of interest, and Cochrane reviews were more likely to report individual intellectual conflicts of interest compared with non-Cochrane reviews (19% and 5%, respectively, p=0.004). Regression analyses showed a positive association between reporting of conflicts of interest (at least one type of conflict of interest, individual financial conflict of interest, institutional financial conflict of interest) and journal impact factor and between reporting individual financial conflicts of interest and pharmacological versus non-pharmacological intervention. Conclusions Although close to half of the published systematic reviews report that authors (typically many) have conflicts of interest, more than half report that they do not. Authors reported individual conflicts of interest more frequently than institutional and non-financial conflicts of interest. PMID:27515760

The scatter of research: cross sectional comparison of randomised trials and systematic reviews across specialties

PubMed Central

Erueti, Chrissy; Thorning, Sarah; Glasziou, Paul

2012-01-01

Objective To estimate the degree of scatter of reports of randomised trials and systematic reviews, and how the scatter differs among medical specialties and subspecialties. Design Cross sectional analysis. Data source PubMed for all disease relevant randomised trials and systematic reviews published in 2009. Study selection Randomised trials and systematic reviews of the nine diseases or disorders with the highest burden of disease, and the broader category of disease to which each belonged. Results The scatter across journals varied considerably among specialties and subspecialties: otolaryngology had the least scatter (363 trials across 167 journals) and neurology the most (2770 trials across 896 journals). In only three subspecialties (lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hearing loss) were 10 or fewer journals needed to locate 50% of trials. The scatter was less for systematic reviews: hearing loss had the least scatter (10 reviews across nine journals) and cancer the most (670 reviews across 279 journals). For some specialties and subspecialties the papers were concentrated in specialty journals; whereas for others, few of the top 10 journals were a specialty journal for that area. Generally, little overlap occurred between the top 10 journals publishing trials and those publishing systematic reviews. The number of journals required to find all trials or reviews was highly correlated (r=0.97) with the number of papers for each specialty/subspecialty. Conclusions Publication rates of speciality relevant trials vary widely, from one to seven trials per day, and are scattered across hundreds of general and specialty journals. Although systematic reviews reduce the extent of scatter, they are still widely scattered and mostly in different journals to those of randomised trials. Personal subscriptions to journals, which are insufficient for keeping up to date with knowledge, need to be supplemented by other methods such as journal scanning services or systems that cover sufficient journals and filter articles for quality and relevance. Few current systems seem adequate. PMID:22597353

Nutrition management methods effective in increasing weight, survival time and functional status in ALS patients: a systematic review.

PubMed

Kellogg, Jaylin; Bottman, Lindsey; Arra, Erin J; Selkirk, Stephen M; Kozlowski, Frances

2018-02-01

Poor prognosis and decreased survival time correlate with the nutritional status of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Various studies were reviewed which assessed weight, body mass index (BMI), survival time and ALS functional rating scale revised (ALSFRS-R) in order to determine the best nutrition management methods for this patient population. A systematic review was conducted using CINAHL, Medline, and PubMed, and various search terms in order to determine the most recent clinical trials and observational studies that have been conducted concerning nutrition and ALS. Four articles met criteria to be included in the review. Data were extracted from these articles and were inputted into the Data Extraction Tool (DET) provided by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND). Results showed that nutrition supplementation does promote weight stabilisation or weight gain in individuals with ALS. Given the low risk and low cost associated with intervention, early and aggressive nutrition intervention is recommended. This systematic review shows that there is a lack of high quality evidence regarding the efficacy of any dietary interventions for promoting survival in ALS or slowing disease progression; therefore more research is necessary related to effects of nutrition interventions.

The impact of pelvic floor muscle training on the quality of life of women with urinary incontinence: a systematic literature review

PubMed Central

Radzimińska, Agnieszka; Strączyńska, Agnieszka; Weber-Rajek, Magdalena; Styczyńska, Hanna; Strojek, Katarzyna; Piekorz, Zuzanna

2018-01-01

Purpose The purpose of this review was to assess the effectiveness of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) in the treatment of urinary incontinence (UI) in women, with a particular focus on the impact of this form of therapy on the patients’ quality of life (QoL). Methods The following electronic databases were searched: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library (articles only in English, 1990–2017). Search terms were as follows: urinary incontinence, pelvic floor muscle training, pelvic floor exercises, quality of life. Systematic review methods were based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Results The assessment of the impact of PFMT on the QoL of women with UI was conducted among 2,394 women in 24 selected studies. After the end of treatment, the majority of patients in the experimental groups noted a statistically significant improvement in QoL. Conclusion The results of this literature review demonstrate that PFMT is an effective treatment for UI in women. PFMT significantly improves the QoL of women with UI, which is an important determinant of their physical, mental, and social functioning.

Systematic review of mirror therapy compared with conventional rehabilitation in upper extremity function in stroke survivors.

PubMed

Pérez-Cruzado, David; Merchán-Baeza, Jose Antonio; González-Sánchez, Manuel; Cuesta-Vargas, Antonio I

2017-04-01

Stroke is a leading cause of disability in developed countries. One of the most widespread techniques in clinical practice is mirror therapy (MT). To determine the effectiveness of MT over other methods of intervention in the recovery of upper limb function in people who have had a stroke. A systematic review was conducted. The search string was established based on the last systematic review about MT that dated from 2009: "upper extremity" OR "upper limb "AND "mirror therapy" AND stroke. For this search Pubmed, Scopus and SciELO databases were used. Fifteen studies were included in the systematic review. Recovery of the upper limb, upper limb function and gross manual dexterity were frequently measured in these studies. In the primary variables in promoting recovery, MT alone showed better results in acute and chronic stroke patients in upper limb functioning than either conventional rehabilitation (CR) or CR plus MT. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015026869. © 2016 Occupational Therapy Australia.

Echocardiography in chronic liver disease: systematic review.

PubMed

Mota, Vitor Gomes; Markman Filho, Brivaldo

2013-04-01

Doppler echocardiography (Echo) is a non-invasive method of excellent accuracy to screen portopulmonary hypertension (PPH) and to assess intrapulmonary shunts (IPS) in chronic liver disease (CLD). In the past decade, Echo proved to play a fundamental role in the diagnosis of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CCM). To perform a systematic review of relevant articles on the subject 'Echo in CLD'. In November 2011, a systematic review was performed in the PubMed, LILACS and SciELO databases, and the characteristics of the studies selected were reported. The search based on descriptors and free terms obtained 204 articles (179 in Pubmed, 21 in LILACS, and 1 in SciELO). Of those 204 articles, 22 were selected for systematic review. A meta-analysis could not be performed because of the heterogeneity of the articles. Echo should be part of CLD stratification for screening PPH, IPS and CCM, because, most of the time, such complications are diagnosed only when patients are already waiting for a liver transplant.

Social Network Analysis for Assessing College-Aged Adults' Health: A Systematic Review.

PubMed

Patterson, Megan S; Go Odson, Patricia

2018-04-13

Social network analysis (SNA) is a useful, emerging method for studying health. College students are especially prone to social influence when it comes to health. This review aimed to identify network variables related to college student health and determine how SNA was used in the literature. A systematic review of relevant literature was conducted in October 2015. Studies employing egocentric or whole network analysis to study college student health were included. We used Garrard's Matrix Method to extract data from reviewed articles (n = 15). Drinking, smoking, aggression, homesickness, and stress were predicted by network variables in the reviewed literature. Methodological inconsistencies concerning boundary specification, data collection, nomination limits, and statistical analyses were revealed across studies. Results show the consistent relationship between network variables and college health outcomes, justifying further use of SNA to research college health. Suggestions and considerations for future use of SNA are provided.

Efficacy of coloured overlays and lenses for treating reading difficulty: an overview of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Suttle, Catherine M; Lawrenson, John G; Conway, Miriam L

2018-04-06

Coloured overlays or lenses are widely available for use by children and adults with difficulties or discomfort while reading. In recent years, systematic reviews have been conducted in an attempt to establish the strength of the evidence base for this intervention. The aim of this overview is to systematically review these reviews. The methodology was published prospectively as a protocol (Prospero CRD42017059172). Online databases Medline, Cinahl, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched for systematic reviews on the efficacy of coloured overlays or lenses for the alleviation of reading difficulty or discomfort. Included studies were appraised using the AMSTAR 2 checklist. Characteristics of included studies such as aspects of methods, results and conclusions were recorded. Both processes were conducted independently by two reviewers and any discrepancies were resolved by discussion. Thirty-one studies were found via databases and other sources. After excluding duplicates and those not fitting the inclusion criteria, four reviews were included in the analysis. While all reviews were systematic, their methodology, results and conclusions differed. Three of the four concluded that there is insufficient good quality evidence to support the use of coloured overlays or lenses for reading difficulty, while one concluded that, despite research limitations, the evidence does support their use. On balance, systematic reviews to date indicate that there is not yet a reliable evidence base on which to recommend coloured overlays or lenses for the alleviation of reading difficulty or discomfort. High quality, low bias research is needed to investigate their effectiveness in different forms of reading difficulty and discomfort for adults and children. © 2018 Optometry Australia.

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

Collaboration challenges in systematic reviews: a survey of health sciences librarians.

PubMed

Nicholson, Joey; McCrillis, Aileen; Williams, Jeff D

2017-10-01

While many librarians have been asked to participate in systematic reviews with researchers, often these researchers are not familiar with the systematic review process or the appropriate role for librarians. The purpose of this study was to identify the challenges and barriers that librarians face when collaborating on systematic reviews. To take a wider view of the whole process of collaborating on systematic reviews, the authors deliberately focused on interpersonal and methodological issues other than searching itself. To characterize the biggest challenges that librarians face while collaborating on systematic review projects, we used a web-based survey. The thirteen-item survey included seventeen challenges grouped into two categories: methodological and interpersonal. Participants were required to indicate the frequency and difficulty of the challenges listed. Open-ended questions allowed survey participants to describe challenges not listed in the survey and to describe strategies used to overcome challenges. Of the 17 challenges listed in the survey, 8 were reported as common by over 40% of respondents. These included methodological issues around having too broad or narrow research questions, lacking eligibility criteria, having unclear research questions, and not following established methods. The remaining challenges were interpersonal, including issues around student-led projects and the size of the research team. Of the top 8 most frequent challenges, 5 were also ranked as most difficult to handle. Open-ended responses underscored many of the challenges included in the survey and revealed several additional challenges. These results suggest that the most frequent and challenging issues relate to development of the research question and general communication with team members. Clear protocols for collaboration on systematic reviews, as well as a culture of mentorship, can help librarians prevent and address these challenges.

Creating a Shared Formulary in 7 Critical Access Hospitals

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wakefield, Douglas S.; Ward, Marcia M.; Loes, Jean L.; O'Brien, John; Abbas, Nancy

2010-01-01

Purpose: This paper reports a case study of 7 Critical Access Hospitals' (CAH) and 1 rural referral hospital's successful collaboration to develop a shared formulary. Methods: Study methods included document reviews, interviews with key informants, and use of descriptive statistics. Findings: Through a systematic review and decision process, CAH…

Methods of Quality Appraisal for Studies Reviewed by Evidence Clearinghouses

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wilson, Sandra Jo; Tanner-Smith, Emily

2015-01-01

This presentation will discuss quality appraisal methods for assessing research studies used in systematic reviews, research syntheses, and evidence-based practice repositories such as the What Works Clearinghouse. The different ways that the methodological rigor and risk of bias of primary studies included in syntheses is assessed means that…

Randomization Methods in Emergency Setting Trials: A Descriptive Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Corbett, Mark Stephen; Moe-Byrne, Thirimon; Oddie, Sam; McGuire, William

2016-01-01

Background: Quasi-randomization might expedite recruitment into trials in emergency care settings but may also introduce selection bias. Methods: We searched the Cochrane Library and other databases for systematic reviews of interventions in emergency medicine or urgent care settings. We assessed selection bias (baseline imbalances) in prognostic…

Social Media for e-Government in the Public Health Sector: Protocol for a Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Franco, Massimo; Tursunbayeva, Aizhan

2016-01-01

Background Public sector organizations worldwide are engaging with social media as part of a growing e-government agenda. These include government departments of health, public health agencies, and state-funded health care and research organizations. Although examples of social media in health have been described in the literature, little is known about their overall scope or how they are achieving the objectives of e-government. A systematic literature review is underway to capture and synthesize existing evidence on the adoption, use, and impacts of social media in the public health sector. A series of parallel scoping exercises has taken place to examine (1) relevant existing systematic reviews, to assess their focus, breadth, and fit with our review topic, (2) existing concepts related to e-government, public health, and the public health sector, to assess how semantic complexity might influence the review process, and (3) the results of pilot searches, to examine the fit of social media within the e-government and health literatures. The methods and observations of the scoping exercises are reported in this protocol, alongside the methods and interim results for the systematic review itself. Objective The systematic review has three main objectives: To capture the corpus of published studies on the uses of social media by public health organizations; to classify the objectives for which social media have been deployed in these contexts and the methods used; and to analyze and synthesize evidence of the uptake, use, and impacts of social media on various outcomes. Methods A set of scoping exercises were undertaken, to inform the search strategy and analytic framework. Searches have been carried out in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and the Scopus international electronic databases, and appropriate gray literature sources. Articles published between January 1, 2004, and July 12, 2015, were included. There was no restriction by language. One reviewer (AT) has independently screened citations generated by the search terms and is extracting data from the selected articles. A second author (CP) is cross-checking the outputs to ensure the fit of selected articles with the inclusion criteria and appropriate data extraction. A PRISMA flow diagram will be created, to track the study selection process and ensure transparency and replicability of the review. Results Scoping work revealed that the literature on social media for e-government in the public health sector is complicated by heterogeneous terminologies and concepts, although studies at the intersection of these three topics exist. Not all types of e-government are evident in the health care literature. Interim results suggest that most relevant articles focus on usage alone. Conclusions Public health organizations may be taking it for granted that social media deliver benefits, rather than attempting to evaluate their adoption or impacts. Published taxonomies of e-government hold promise for organizing and interpreting the review results. The systematic review is underway and completion is expected in the beginning of 2016. Trial Registration PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRD42015024731; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42015024731 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6dV1Cin91). PMID:26969199

Synthesising quantitative and qualitative research in evidence-based patient information.

PubMed

Goldsmith, Megan R; Bankhead, Clare R; Austoker, Joan

2007-03-01

Systematic reviews have, in the past, focused on quantitative studies and clinical effectiveness, while excluding qualitative evidence. Qualitative research can inform evidence-based practice independently of other research methodologies but methods for the synthesis of such data are currently evolving. Synthesising quantitative and qualitative research in a single review is an important methodological challenge. This paper describes the review methods developed and the difficulties encountered during the process of updating a systematic review of evidence to inform guidelines for the content of patient information related to cervical screening. Systematic searches of 12 electronic databases (January 1996 to July 2004) were conducted. Studies that evaluated the content of information provided to women about cervical screening or that addressed women's information needs were assessed for inclusion. A data extraction form and quality assessment criteria were developed from published resources. A non-quantitative synthesis was conducted and a tabular evidence profile for each important outcome (eg "explain what the test involves") was prepared. The overall quality of evidence for each outcome was then assessed using an approach published by the GRADE working group, which was adapted to suit the review questions and modified to include qualitative research evidence. Quantitative and qualitative studies were considered separately for every outcome. 32 papers were included in the systematic review following data extraction and assessment of methodological quality. The review questions were best answered by evidence from a range of data sources. The inclusion of qualitative research, which was often highly relevant and specific to many components of the screening information materials, enabled the production of a set of recommendations that will directly affect policy within the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. A practical example is provided of how quantitative and qualitative data sources might successfully be brought together and considered in one review.

The landscape of knowledge translation interventions in cancer control: What do we know and where to next? A review of systematic reviews

PubMed Central

2011-01-01

Background Effective implementation strategies are needed to optimize advancements in the fields of cancer diagnosis, treatment, survivorship, and end-of-life care. We conducted a review of systematic reviews to better understand the evidentiary base of implementation strategies in cancer control. Methods Using three databases, we conducted a search and identified English-language systematic reviews published between 2005 and 2010 that targeted consumer, professional, organizational, regulatory, or financial interventions, tested exclusively or partially in a cancer context (primary focus); generic or non-cancer-specific reviews were also considered. Data were extracted, appraised, and analyzed by members of the research team, and research ideas to advance the field were proposed. Results Thirty-four systematic reviews providing 41 summaries of evidence on 19 unique interventions comprised the evidence base. AMSTAR quality ratings ranged between 2 and 10. Team members rated most of the interventions as promising and in need of further research, and 64 research ideas were identified. Conclusions While many interventions show promise of effectiveness in the cancer-control context, few reviews were able to conclude definitively in favor of or against a specific intervention. We discuss the complexity of implementation research and offer suggestions to advance the science in this area. PMID:22185329

Environmental scan and evaluation of best practices for online systematic review resources.

PubMed

Parker, Robin M N; Boulos, Leah M; Visintini, Sarah; Ritchie, Krista; Hayden, Jill

2018-04-01

Online training for systematic review methodology is an attractive option due to flexibility and limited availability of in-person instruction. Librarians often direct new reviewers to these online resources, so they should be knowledgeable about the variety of available resources. The objective for this project was to conduct an environmental scan of online systematic review training resources and evaluate those identified resources. The authors systematically searched for electronic learning resources pertaining to systematic review methods. After screening for inclusion, we collected data about characteristics of training resources and assigned scores in the domains of (1) content, (2) design, (3) interactivity, and (4) usability by applying a previously published evaluation rubric for online instruction modules. We described the characteristics and scores for each training resource and compared performance across the domains. Twenty training resources were evaluated. Average overall score of online instructional resources was 61%. Online courses (n=7) averaged 73%, web modules (n=5) 64%, and videos (n=8) 48%. The top 5 highest scoring resources were in course or web module format, featured high interactivity, and required a longer (>5hrs) time commitment from users. This study revealed that resources include appropriate content but are less likely to adhere to principles of online training design and interactivity. Awareness of these resources will allow librarians to make informed recommendations for training based on patrons' needs. Future online systematic review training resources should use established best practices for e-learning to provide high-quality resources, regardless of format or user time commitment.

Descriptive analysis of cochrane child-relevant systematic reviews: an update and comparison between 2009 and 2013.

PubMed

Crick, Katelynn; Thomson, Denise; Fernandes, Ricardo M; Nuspl, Megan; Eurich, Dean T; Rowe, Brian H; Hartling, Lisa

2017-07-11

Systematic reviews support health systems and clinical decision-making by identifying and summarizing all existing studies on a particular topic. In 2009, a comprehensive description of child-relevant systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was compiled. This study aims to provide an update, and to describe these systematic reviews according to their content and methodological approaches. All child-relevant systematic reviews published by the Cochrane Collaboration in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) as of March, 2013 were identified and described in relation to their content and methodological approaches. This step equated to an update of the Child Health Field Review Register (CHFRR). The content of the updated CHFRR was compared to the published 2009 CHFRR description regarding clinical and methodological characteristics, using bivariate analyses. As the Cochrane Collaboration has recognized that disease burden should guide research prioritization, we extracted data from the Global and National Burden of Diseases and Injuries Among Children and Adolescents Between 1990 and 2013 study in order to map the distribution of the burden of disease in child health to the distribution of evidence across Review Groups in the CHFRR. Of the 5,520 potential Cochrane systematic reviews identified, 1,293 (23.4%) were child-relevant (an increase of 24% since 2009). Overall, these reviews included 16,738 primary studies. The most commonly represented Review Groups were Airways (11.5%), Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Diseases (7.9%), Acute Respiratory Infections (7.8%), Developmental, Psychological and Learning Problems (6.7%), and Infectious Diseases (6.2%). Corresponding authors were most often from Europe (51%), North America (15%), and Australia (15%). The majority of systematic reviews examined pharmacological interventions alone (52% compared to 59% in 2009). Out of 611 reviews that were assessed as up-to-date, GRADE was used in 204 (35%) reviews to assess the overall quality of the evidence, which was often moderate (35.6%) or low (37.8%) for primary outcomes. Ninety percent of reviews that were assessed as up to date used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, or a modified version, to assess methodological quality. Most reviews conducted one or more meta-analyses (73%). Among the 25 leading causes of death globally, the Review Groups associated with the largest number of causes were: 1) Infectious Diseases, 2) Anaesthesia, Critical, and Emergency Care, 3) Injuries, 4) Pregnancy and Childbirth (PC), and 5) Neonatal. There were large discrepancies between the number of causes of mortality that each Review Group was associated with and the total amount of evidence each Review Group contributed to the CHFRR. Ninety-eight percent of the causes of mortality in 2013 were from developing nations, but only 224 (17.3%) reviews had corresponding authors from developing countries. The content and methodological characteristics of child-relevant systematic reviews in the Cochrane CHFRR have been described in detail. There were modest advances in methods between 2009 and 2013. Systematic reviews contained in the CDSR offer an important resource for researcher's, clinicians and policy makers by synthesizing an extensive body of primary research. Further content analysis will allow the identification of clinical topics of greatest priority for future systematic reviews in child health.

Examining the relationship between infectious diseases and flooding in Europe: A systematic literature review and summary of possible public health interventions.

PubMed

Brown, Lisa; Murray, Virginia

2013-01-01

Introduction Many infectious diseases are sensitive to climatic changes; specifically, flooding. This systematic literature review aimed to strengthen the quality and completeness of evidence on infectious diseases following flooding, relevant to Europe. Methods A systematic literature review from 2004-2012 was performed. Focused searches of the following databases were conducted: Medline, Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Evidence Aid. Personal communications with key informants were also reviewed. Results Thirty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Evidence suggested that water-borne, rodent-borne, and vector-borne diseases have been associated with flooding in Europe, although at a lower incidence than developing countries. Conclusion Disease surveillance and early warning systems, coupled with effective prevention and response capabilities, can reduce current and future vulnerability to infectious diseases following flooding.

Systematic Review of the Literature on Pain in Patients with Polytrauma Including Traumatic Brain Injury

PubMed Central

Dobscha, Steven K.; Clark, Michael E.; Morasco, Benjamin J.; Freeman, Michele; Campbell, Rose; Helfand, Mark

2010-01-01

Objective To review the literature addressing the assessment and management of pain in patients with polytraumatic injuries including traumatic brain injury (TBI) and blast-related headache, and to identify patient, clinician and systems factors associated with pain-related outcomes. Design Systematic review. Methods We conducted searches in MEDLINE of literature published from 1950 through July 2008. Due to a limited number of studies using controls or comparators, we included observational and rigorous qualitative studies. We systematically rated the quality of systematic reviews, cohort, and case-control design studies. Results One systematic review, 93 observational studies, and one qualitative research study met inclusion criteria. The literature search yielded no published studies that assessed measures of pain intensity or pain-related functional interference among patients with cognitive deficits due to TBI, that compared patients with blast-related headache with patients with other types of headache, or that assessed treatments for blast-related headache pain. Studies on the association between TBI severity and pain reported mixed findings. There was limited evidence that the following factors are associated with pain among TBI patients: severity, location, and multiplicity of injuries; insomnia; fatigue; depression; and post-traumatic stress disorder. Conclusions Very little evidence is currently available to guide pain assessment and treatment approaches in patients with polytrauma. Further research employing systematic observational as well as controlled intervention designs is clearly indicated. PMID:19818031

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.

Systematic Review of Methods in Low-Consensus Fields: Supporting Commensuration through `Construct-Centered Methods Aggregation' in the Case of Climate Change Vulnerability Research.

PubMed

Delaney, Aogán; Tamás, Peter A; Crane, Todd A; Chesterman, Sabrina

2016-01-01

There is increasing interest in using systematic review to synthesize evidence on the social and environmental effects of and adaptations to climate change. Use of systematic review for evidence in this field is complicated by the heterogeneity of methods used and by uneven reporting. In order to facilitate synthesis of results and design of subsequent research a method, construct-centered methods aggregation, was designed to 1) provide a transparent, valid and reliable description of research methods, 2) support comparability of primary studies and 3) contribute to a shared empirical basis for improving research practice. Rather than taking research reports at face value, research designs are reviewed through inductive analysis. This involves bottom-up identification of constructs, definitions and operationalizations; assessment of concepts' commensurability through comparison of definitions; identification of theoretical frameworks through patterns of construct use; and integration of transparently reported and valid operationalizations into ideal-type research frameworks. Through the integration of reliable bottom-up inductive coding from operationalizations and top-down coding driven from stated theory with expert interpretation, construct-centered methods aggregation enabled both resolution of heterogeneity within identically named constructs and merging of differently labeled but identical constructs. These two processes allowed transparent, rigorous and contextually sensitive synthesis of the research presented in an uneven set of reports undertaken in a heterogenous field. If adopted more broadly, construct-centered methods aggregation may contribute to the emergence of a valid, empirically-grounded description of methods used in primary research. These descriptions may function as a set of expectations that improves the transparency of reporting and as an evolving comprehensive framework that supports both interpretation of existing and design of future research.

Systematic Review of Methods in Low-Consensus Fields: Supporting Commensuration through `Construct-Centered Methods Aggregation’ in the Case of Climate Change Vulnerability Research

PubMed Central

Crane, Todd A.; Chesterman, Sabrina

2016-01-01

There is increasing interest in using systematic review to synthesize evidence on the social and environmental effects of and adaptations to climate change. Use of systematic review for evidence in this field is complicated by the heterogeneity of methods used and by uneven reporting. In order to facilitate synthesis of results and design of subsequent research a method, construct-centered methods aggregation, was designed to 1) provide a transparent, valid and reliable description of research methods, 2) support comparability of primary studies and 3) contribute to a shared empirical basis for improving research practice. Rather than taking research reports at face value, research designs are reviewed through inductive analysis. This involves bottom-up identification of constructs, definitions and operationalizations; assessment of concepts’ commensurability through comparison of definitions; identification of theoretical frameworks through patterns of construct use; and integration of transparently reported and valid operationalizations into ideal-type research frameworks. Through the integration of reliable bottom-up inductive coding from operationalizations and top-down coding driven from stated theory with expert interpretation, construct-centered methods aggregation enabled both resolution of heterogeneity within identically named constructs and merging of differently labeled but identical constructs. These two processes allowed transparent, rigorous and contextually sensitive synthesis of the research presented in an uneven set of reports undertaken in a heterogenous field. If adopted more broadly, construct-centered methods aggregation may contribute to the emergence of a valid, empirically-grounded description of methods used in primary research. These descriptions may function as a set of expectations that improves the transparency of reporting and as an evolving comprehensive framework that supports both interpretation of existing and design of future research. PMID:26901409

A Systematic Review to Uncover a Universal Protocol for Accuracy Assessment of 3-Dimensional Virtually Planned Orthognathic Surgery.

PubMed

Gaber, Ramy M; Shaheen, Eman; Falter, Bart; Araya, Sebastian; Politis, Constantinus; Swennen, Gwen R J; Jacobs, Reinhilde

2017-11-01

The aim of this study was to systematically review methods used for assessing the accuracy of 3-dimensional virtually planned orthognathic surgery in an attempt to reach an objective assessment protocol that could be universally used. A systematic review of the currently available literature, published until September 12, 2016, was conducted using PubMed as the primary search engine. We performed secondary searches using the Cochrane Database, clinical trial registries, Google Scholar, and Embase, as well as a bibliography search. Included articles were required to have stated clearly that 3-dimensional virtual planning was used and accuracy assessment performed, along with validation of the planning and/or assessment method. Descriptive statistics and quality assessment of included articles were performed. The initial search yielded 1,461 studies. Only 7 studies were included in our review. An important variability was found regarding methods used for 1) accuracy assessment of virtually planned orthognathic surgery or 2) validation of the tools used. Included studies were of moderate quality; reviewers' agreement regarding quality was calculated to be 0.5 using the Cohen κ test. On the basis of the findings of this review, it is evident that the literature lacks consensus regarding accuracy assessment. Hence, a protocol is suggested for accuracy assessment of virtually planned orthognathic surgery with the lowest margin of error. Copyright © 2017 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

What is open peer review? A systematic review.

PubMed

Ross-Hellauer, Tony

2017-01-01

Background : "Open peer review" (OPR), despite being a major pillar of Open Science, has neither a standardized definition nor an agreed schema of its features and implementations. The literature reflects this, with numerous overlapping and contradictory definitions. While for some the term refers to peer review where the identities of both author and reviewer are disclosed to each other, for others it signifies systems where reviewer reports are published alongside articles. For others it signifies both of these conditions, and for yet others it describes systems where not only "invited experts" are able to comment. For still others, it includes a variety of combinations of these and other novel methods. Methods : Recognising the absence of a consensus view on what open peer review is, this article undertakes a systematic review of definitions of "open peer review" or "open review", to create a corpus of 122 definitions. These definitions are systematically analysed to build a coherent typology of the various innovations in peer review signified by the term, and hence provide the precise technical definition currently lacking. Results : This quantifiable data yields rich information on the range and extent of differing definitions over time and by broad subject area. Quantifying definitions in this way allows us to accurately portray exactly how ambiguously the phrase "open peer review" has been used thus far, for the literature offers 22 distinct configurations of seven traits, effectively meaning that there are 22 different definitions of OPR in the literature reviewed. Conclusions : I propose a pragmatic definition of open peer review as an umbrella term for a number of overlapping ways that peer review models can be adapted in line with the aims of Open Science, including making reviewer and author identities open, publishing review reports and enabling greater participation in the peer review process.

Studying the Positive Influence of the Use of Video in Teaching & Learning Environments, Focusing on Registration of the Directions Where It Improves the PBL Effectiveness: A Systematic Literature Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Aronis, Alexis

2016-01-01

Previous studies report the involvement of the use of video in the frameworks of problem-based learning (PBL), case-based learning, and project-based learning. This systematic literature review, through two research questions, explores the positive influence of the use of video in those instructional methods, and, while focusing on PBL, identifies…

Evidence summaries tailored to health policy-makers in low- and middle-income countries

PubMed Central

Glenton, Claire; Wiysonge, Charles Shey; Abalos, Edgardo; Mignini, Luciano; Young, Taryn; Althabe, Fernando; Ciapponi, Agustín; Marti, Sebastian Garcia; Meng, Qingyue; Wang, Jian; la Hoz Bradford, Ana Maria De; Kiwanuka, Suzanne N; Rutebemberwa, Elizeus; Pariyo, George W; Flottorp, Signe; Oxman, Andrew D

2011-01-01

Abstract Objective To describe how the SUPPORT collaboration developed a short summary format for presenting the results of systematic reviews to policy-makers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods We carried out 21 user tests in six countries to explore users’ experiences with the summary format. We modified the summaries based on the results and checked our conclusions through 13 follow-up interviews. To solve the problems uncovered by the user testing, we also obtained advisory group feedback and conducted working group workshops. Findings Policy-makers liked a graded entry format (i.e. short summary with key messages up front). They particularly valued the section on the relevance of the summaries for LMICs, which compensated for the lack of locally-relevant detail in the original review. Some struggled to understand the text and numbers. Three issues made redesigning the summaries particularly challenging: (i) participants had a poor understanding of what a systematic review was; (ii) they expected information not found in the systematic reviews and (iii) they wanted shorter, clearer summaries. Solutions included adding information to help understand the nature of a systematic review, adding more references and making the content clearer and the document quicker to scan. Conclusion Presenting evidence from systematic reviews to policy-makers in LMICs in the form of short summaries can render the information easier to assimilate and more useful, but summaries must be clear and easy to read or scan quickly. They should also explain the nature of the information provided by systematic reviews and its relevance for policy decisions. PMID:21346891

The Role of the Occupational Therapist in Disaster Areas: Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Parente, M.; De Santis, R.; Esposito, G.; Santilli, V.

2017-01-01

Background Disasters are increasingly more frequent events on our planet. During disaster the role of the occupational therapist will require a more specific operative framework within nongovernmental organizations and community health services. Design Systematic review. Objective The aim of this study is to evaluate the evidence that highlight occupational therapist's role in disaster area through a systematic review. Materials and Methods Research on MEDLINE was performed. All articles from 2005 to 2015 concerning rehabilitation and occupational therapy in disaster areas were included. Results Ten studies were selected to be included in this review. Four interesting points emerged: the importance of having rehabilitation intervention in postdisaster situations, the necessity to include a rehabilitation team in the early phase of disaster response, the need to provide a method to address the difficult evacuation, and finding the safest method of transport of people with preexisting disabilities and new injuries. Conclusions The amount of evidence with respect to specific intervention of the occupational therapist's role in a disaster situation is limited. However some evidence suggests that it could be a good means for reducing the number of medical complications and deaths of persons with preexisting disabilities. The evidences found highlight the necessity to create a multidisciplinary team addressing needs in disasters situation, in which the occupational therapist could certainly contribute. PMID:29097975

The Epidemiology and Associated Phenomenology of Formal Thought Disorder: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Roche, Eric; Creed, Lisa; MacMahon, Donagh; Brennan, Daria; Clarke, Mary

2015-01-01

Background: Authors of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM-V) have recommended to “integrate dimensions into clinical practice.” The epidemiology and associated phenomenology of formal thought disorder (FTD) have been described but not reviewed. We aimed to carry out a systematic review of FTD to this end. Methods: A systematic review of FTD literature, from 1978 to 2013, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: A total of 881 abstracts were reviewed and 120 articles met inclusion criteria; articles describing FTD factor structure (n = 15), prevalence and longitudinal course (n = 41), role in diagnosis (n = 22), associated clinical variables (n = 56), and influence on outcome (n = 35) were included. Prevalence estimates for FTD in psychosis range from 5% to 91%. Dividing FTD into domains, by factor analysis, can accurately identify 91% of psychotic diagnoses. FTD is associated with increased clinical severity. Poorer outcomes are predicted by negative thought disorder, more so than the typical construct of “disorganized speech.” Conclusion: FTD is a common symptom of psychosis and may be considered a marker of illness severity. Detailed dimensional assessment of FTD can clarify diagnosis and may help predict prognosis. PMID:25180313

Colic in infants.

PubMed

Lucassen, Peter

2010-02-05

Colic in infants causes one in six families (17%) with children to consult a health professional. One systematic review of 15 community-based studies found a wide variation in prevalence, which depended on study design and method of recording. We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for colic in infants? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to September 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). We found 27 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions. In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: advice to increase carrying, advice to reduce stimulation, casein hydrolysate milk, cranial osteopathy, crib vibrator device, focused counselling, gripe water, infant massage, low-lactose milk, simethicone, soya-based infant feeds, spinal manipulation, and whey hydrolysate milk.

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.

Conflicts of interest and spin in reviews of psychological therapies: a systematic review

PubMed Central

Lieb, Klaus; von der Osten-Sacken, Jan; Stoffers-Winterling, Jutta; Reiss, Neele; Barth, Jürgen

2016-01-01

Objective To explore conflicts of interest (COI) and their reporting in systematic reviews of psychological therapies, and to evaluate spin in the conclusions of the reviews. Methods MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases were searched for systematic reviews published between 2010 and 2013 that assessed effects of psychological therapies for anxiety, depressive or personality disorders, and included at least one randomised controlled trial. Required COI disclosure by journal, disclosed COI by review authors, and the inclusion of own primary studies by review authors were extracted. Researcher allegiance, that is, that researchers concluded favourably about the interventions they have studied, as well as spin, that is, differences between results and conclusions of the reviews, were rated by 2 independent raters. Results 936 references were retrieved, 95 reviews fulfilled eligibility criteria. 59 compared psychological therapies with other forms of psychological therapies, and 36 psychological therapies with pharmacological interventions. Financial, non-financial, and personal COI were disclosed in 22, 4 and 1 review, respectively. 2 of 86 own primary studies of review authors included in 34 reviews were disclosed by review authors. In 15 of the reviews, authors showed an allegiance effect to the evaluated psychological therapy that was never disclosed. Spin in review conclusions was found in 27 of 95 reviews. Reviews with a conclusion in favour of psychological therapies (vs pharmacological interventions) were at high risk for a spin in conclusions (OR=8.31 (1.41 to 49.05)). Spin was related in trend to the inclusion of own primary studies in the systematic review (OR=2.08 (CI 0.83 to 5.18) p=0.11) and researcher allegiance (OR=2.63 (0.84 to 8.16) p=0.16). Conclusions Non-financial COI, especially the inclusion of own primary studies into reviews and researcher allegiance, are frequently seen in systematic reviews of psychological therapies and need more transparency and better management. PMID:27118287

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.

Treatment Adherence in Patients With Headache: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Ramsey, Rachelle R.; Ryan, Jamie L.; Hershey, Andrew D.; Powers, Scott W.; Aylward, Brandon S.; Hommel, Kevin A.

2017-01-01

Objective To review and critically evaluate the extant research literature pertaining to adherence in youth and adults with headache and to provide recommendations for future research. Background This article provides the first systematic review of pediatric headache adherence and updates a previous review of treatment adherence in adults with headache. Design Systematic review of empirical literature. Methods A literature search with no date restriction was conducted using PubMed and PsycINFO electronic databases and bibliographies of relevant articles. Results Adherence rates in adults with headache range considerably from 25% to 94% across treatment, assessment method, and definition of adherence utilized. Methods to assess adherence included retrospective prescription claims data, paper or electronic diaries, follow-up appointment attendance, written and verbal self-report of general adherence, verbal self-report of adherence over a specific amount of time via in person interview or telephone, validated adherence measures, adherence questionnaires without validation, and counselor ratings of homework. Each methodology and assessment tool demonstrated strengths and weaknesses. No studies have systematically examined medication adherence in children with headache, and the few available studies examining adherence to behavioral treatment have documented adherence rates ranging from 52% to 86%. Conclusions Adherence research in adults with headache is growing, but studies demonstrate a number of methodological shortcomings. Adherence research in children with headache, and adherence intervention research in both adults and children, is scant. Future research should use objective measures of adherence, consider over-the-counter medications and medication overuse, examine demographic, psychological, and behavioral correlates of adherence, assess adherence to botulinum toxin type A, and examine the efficacy of adherence interventions in individuals with headache. PMID:24750017

Mobility and increased risk of HIV acquisition in South Africa: a mixed-method systematic review protocol.

PubMed

Dzomba, Armstrong; Govender, Kaymarlin; Mashamba-Thompson, Tivani P; Tanser, Frank

2018-02-27

In South Africa (home of the largest HIV epidemic globally), there are high levels of mobility. While studies produced in the recent past provide useful perspectives to the mobility-HIV risk linkage, systematic analyses are needed for in-depth understanding of the complex dynamics between mobility and HIV risk. We plan to undertake an evidence-based review of existing literature connecting mobility and increased risky sexual behavior as well as risk of HIV acquisition in South Africa. We will conduct a mixed-method systematic review of peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2015. In particular, we will search for relevant South African studies from the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and J-STOR databases. Studies explicitly examining HIV and labor migration will be eligible for inclusion, while non-empirical work and other studies on key vulnerable populations such as commercial sex workers (CSW) and men who have sex with men (MSM) will be excluded. The proposed mixed-method systematic review will employ a three-phase sequential approach [i.e., (i) identifying relevant studies through data extraction (validated by use of Distiller-SR data management software), (ii) qualitative synthesis, and (iii) quantitative synthesis including meta-analysis data]. Recurrent ideas and conclusions from syntheses will be compiled into key themes and further processed into categories and sub-themes constituting the primary and secondary outcomes of this study. Synthesis of main findings from different studies examining the subject issue here may uncover important research gaps in this literature, laying a strong foundation for research and development of sustainable localized migrant-specific HIV prevention strategies in South Africa. Our protocol was registered with PROSPERO under registration number: CRD 42017055580. ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42017055580 ).

Does Creative Drama Promote Language Development in Early Childhood? A Review of the Methods and Measures Employed in the Empirical Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Mages, Wendy Karen

2008-01-01

This systematic review of the literature synthesizes research from a number of disciplines and provides a succinct distillation of the methods and measures used to study the impact of creative drama on the language development of young children. An analysis of the merits and limitations of the reviewed studies reveals a number of methodological…

Standardized assessment of psychosocial factors and their influence on medically confirmed health outcomes in workers: a systematic review.

PubMed

Rosário, Susel; Fonseca, João A; Nienhaus, Albert; da Costa, José Torres

2016-01-01

Previous studies of psychosocial work factors have indicated their importance for workers' health. However, to what extent health problems can be attributed to the nature of the work environment or other psychosocial factors is not clear. No previous systematic review has used inclusion criteria based on specific medical evaluation of work-related health outcomes and the use of validated instruments for the assessment of the psychosocial (work) environment. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence assessing the relationship between the psychosocial work environment and workers' health based on studies that used standardized and validated instruments to assess the psychosocial work environment and that focused on medically confirmed health outcomes. A systematic review of the literature was carried out by searching the databases PubMed, B-ON, Science Direct, Psycarticles, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection and the search engine (Google Scholar) using appropriate words for studies published from 2004 to 2014. This review follows the recommendations of the Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews (PRISMA). Studies were included in the review if data on psychosocial validated assessment method(s) for the study population and specific medical evaluation of health-related work outcome(s) were presented. In total, the search strategy yielded 10,623 references, of which 10 studies (seven prospective cohort and three cross-sectional) met the inclusion criteria. Most studies (7/10) observed an adverse effect of poor psychosocial work factors on workers' health: 3 on sickness absence, 4 on cardiovascular diseases. The other 3 studies reported detrimental effects on sleep and on disease-associated biomarkers. A more consistent effect was observed in studies of higher methodological quality that used a prospective design jointly with the use of validated instruments for the assessment of the psychosocial (work) environment and clinical evaluation. More prospective studies are needed to assess the evidence of work-related psychosocial factors on workers´ health.

Information retrieval for systematic reviews in food and feed topics: A narrative review.

PubMed

Wood, Hannah; O'Connor, Annette; Sargeant, Jan; Glanville, Julie

2018-01-09

Systematic review methods are now being used for reviews of food production, food safety and security, plant health, and animal health and welfare. Information retrieval methods in this context have been informed by human health-care approaches and ideally should be based on relevant research and experience. This narrative review seeks to identify and summarize current research-based evidence and experience on information retrieval for systematic reviews in food and feed topics. MEDLINE (Ovid), Science Citation Index (Web of Science), and ScienceDirect (http://www.sciencedirect.com/) were searched in 2012 and 2016. We also contacted topic experts and undertook citation searches. We selected and summarized studies reporting research on information retrieval, as well as published guidance and experience. There is little published evidence on the most efficient way to conduct searches for food and feed topics. There are few available study design search filters, and their use may be problematic given poor or inconsistent reporting of study methods. Food and feed research makes use of a wide range of study designs so it might be best to focus strategy development on capturing study populations, although this also has challenges. There is limited guidance on which resources should be searched and whether publication bias in disciplines relevant to food and feed necessitates extensive searching of the gray literature. There is some limited evidence on information retrieval approaches, but more research is required to inform effective and efficient approaches to searching to populate food and feed reviews. Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Barriers and facilitators to physical activity in people with hip or knee osteoarthritis: protocol for a systematic review of qualitative evidence

PubMed Central

Kanavaki, Archontissa M; Rushton, Alison; Klocke, Rainer; Abhishek, Abhishek; Duda, Joan L

2016-01-01

Introduction This protocol aims to describe the objective and methods to be followed in a systematic review of qualitative studies on barriers and facilitators to physical activity (PA) in people with hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods and analysis MEDLINE, EMBASE, PhychINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Scopus and grey literature sources will be electronically searched. Hand search of qualitative research-centred journals, reference screening of relevant reviews and inquiries to researchers active in the field will complement the search. Studies will be selected if they apply qualitative or mixed-methods designs to directly explore factors that correspond to engagement in PA/exercise or, the perceptions regarding PA/exercise in people with hip or knee OA. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Qualitative Checklist and the evaluative criteria of credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability will be applied for the study appraisal. 2 independent reviewers will perform the search, study selection and study appraisal. Thematic synthesis will be used for synthesising the findings of the primary studies and the process and product of the synthesis will be checked by a second researcher. ConQual approach will be used for assessing the confidence in the qualitative findings. Ethics and dissemination This systematic review will inform our understanding of the PA determinants and how to optimise behaviour change in people living with hip or knee OA. The review findings will be reported in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at national or international conferences. The study raises no ethical issues. Trial registration number CRD42016030024. PMID:27810971