Evidence map of studies evaluating methods for conducting, interpreting and reporting overviews of systematic reviews of interventions: Rationale and design

被引:28
|
作者
Lunny C. [1 ]
Brennan S.E. [1 ]
McDonald S. [1 ]
McKenzie J.E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Monash University, Australasian Cochrane Centre, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, 549 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, 3004, VIC
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Evidence map; Evidenced-based methods; Overviews of systematic reviews;
D O I
10.1186/s13643-015-0178-0
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Overviews of systematic reviews attempt to systematically retrieve and summarise the results of multiple systematic reviews into a single document. Methods for conducting, interpreting and reporting overviews of reviews are in their infancy. To date, there has been no systematic review or evidence map examining the range of methods for overviews nor of the evidence for using these methods. The objectives of the study are to develop and populate a framework of methods that have or may be used in conducting, interpreting and reporting overviews of systematic reviews of interventions (stage I); create an evidence map of studies that have evaluated these methods (stage II); and identify and describe unique methodological challenges of overviews. Methods: The research will be undertaken in two stages. For both stages, we plan to search methods collections (e.g. Cochrane Methodology Register, Meth4ReSyn library, AHRQ Effective Health Care Program) to identify eligible studies. These searches will be supplemented by searching reference lists and citation searching. Stage I: Methods used in overviews will be identified from articles describing methods for overviews, methods studies examining a cross section/cohort of overviews, guidance documents and commentaries. The identified methods will populate a framework of available methods for conducting an overview. Two reviewers will independently code included studies to develop the framework. Thematic analysis of the coded data will be used to categorise and describe methods. Stage II: Evaluations of the performance of methods will be identified from systematic reviews of methods studies and methods studies. Evaluations will be described and mapped to the framework of methods identified in stage I. Discussion: The results of this process will be useful for mapping of methods for overviews of systematic reviews, informing guidance and identifying and prioritising method research in this field. © 2016 Lunny et al.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Design, methods, and reporting of impact studies of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules are suboptimal: a systematic review
    Ban, Jong-Wook
    Chan, Mei Sum
    Muthee, Tonny Brian
    Paez, Arsenio
    Stevens, Richard
    Perera, Rafael
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2021, 133 : 111 - 120
  • [42] Protocol for conducting scoping reviews to map implementation strategies in different care settings: focusing on evidence-based interventions for preselected phenomena in people with dementia
    Manietta, Christina
    Quasdorf, Tina
    Rommerskirch-Manietta, Mike
    Braunwarth, Jana Isabelle
    Purwins, Daniel
    Roes, Martina
    BMJ OPEN, 2021, 11 (09):
  • [43] Non-randomized studies as a source of complementary, sequential or replacement evidence for randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions
    Schuenemann, Holger J.
    Tugwell, Peter
    Reeves, Barnaby C.
    Akl, Elie A.
    Santesso, Nancy
    Spencer, Frederick A.
    Shea, Beverley
    Wells, George
    Helfand, Mark
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2013, 4 (01) : 49 - 62
  • [44] Design characteristics and statistical methods used in interrupted time series studies evaluating public health interventions: a review
    Turner, Simon L.
    Karahalios, Amalia
    Forbes, Andrew B.
    Taljaard, Monica
    Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
    Cheng, Allen C.
    Bero, Lisa
    McKenzie, Joanne E.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2020, 122 : 1 - 11
  • [45] Issues relating to study design and risk of bias when including non-randomized studies in systematic reviews on the effects of interventions
    Higgins, Julian P. T.
    Ramsay, Craig
    Reeves, Barnaby C.
    Deeks, Jonathan J.
    Shea, Beverley
    Valentine, Jeffrey C.
    Tugwellh, Peter
    Wellsi, George
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2013, 4 (01) : 12 - 25
  • [46] A systematic review of how studies describe educational interventions for evidence-based practice: stage 1 of the development of a reporting guideline
    Anna C Phillips
    Lucy K Lewis
    Maureen P McEvoy
    James Galipeau
    Paul Glasziou
    Marilyn Hammick
    David Moher
    Julie K Tilson
    Marie T Williams
    BMC Medical Education, 14
  • [47] A systematic review of how studies describe educational interventions for evidence-based practice: stage 1 of the development of a reporting guideline
    Phillips, Anna C.
    Lewis, Lucy K.
    McEvoy, Maureen P.
    Galipeau, James
    Glasziou, Paul
    Hammick, Marilyn
    Moher, David
    Tilson, Julie K.
    Williams, Marie T.
    BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2014, 14
  • [48] Variation in methods, results and reporting in electronic health record-based studies evaluating routine care in gout: A systematic review
    Crossfield, Samantha S. R.
    Lai, Lana Yin Hui
    Kingsbury, Sarah R.
    Baxter, Paul
    Johnson, Owen
    Conaghan, Philip G.
    Pujades-Rodriguez, Mar
    PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (10):
  • [49] Design characteristics and statistical methods used in interrupted time series studies evaluating public health interventions: protocol for a review
    Turner, Simon L.
    Karahalios, Amalia
    Forbes, Andrew B.
    Taljaard, Monica
    Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
    Cheng, Allen C.
    Bero, Lisa
    McKenzie, Joanne E.
    BMJ OPEN, 2019, 9 (01):
  • [50] Mega-map of systematic reviews and evidence and gap maps on the interventions to improve child well-being in low- and middle-income countries
    Saran, Ashrita
    White, Howard
    Albright, Kerry
    Adona, Jill
    CAMPBELL SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2020, 16 (04)