Running on Empty: The Cochrane Empty Reviews Project report of findings and consensus group feedback
|
|
- Jemimah Watkins
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Running on Empty: report of findings and consensus group feedback Paul Montgomery, University of Oxford Joanne Yaffe, University of Utah Sally Hopewell, UK Cochrane Centre Lindsay Shepard, University of Utah The Empty Reviews Project is funded by the Cochrane Opportunities Fund
2 Empty Reviews Project Group Consensus Meeting Group Julian Higgins Cochrane Handbook Cambridge, UK David Moher Consensus Meetings/Guideline Design Ontario, Canada David Tovey Cochrane Editorial Unit London, UK Geraldine MacDonald DPLP Group High Nos. of Empty Reviews Belfast, NI Samantha Faulkner ENT Group Policy on Empty Reviews Oxford, UK Catherine McIlwain Consumers Oxford, UK Iain Chalmers Author of Empty Reviews Oxford, UK Sasha Shepperd EPOC Group Author Oxford, UK Apologies Claire Williams Heart Group Low No. of Empty Reviews London, UK Barney Reeves Non Randomised Studies Methods Group Bristol, UK Empty Reviews Project Core Team Jo Yaffe Paul Montgomery Sally Hopewell Lindsay Shepard Utah, USA Oxford, UK Oxford, UK Utah, USA
3 Summary of Session Presentation Introduction to the issue of empty reviews in The CDSR Update on the project to date Report on the consensus meeting Feedback and interactive discussion to move the project forward with your views
4 Definition An empty review is one that reports no studies eligible for inclusion.
5 How Do Systematic Reviews Come to Be Empty? Lack of high quality studies to address question posed and/or A very narrow population A very focused intervention Specific outcomes Many plan empty reviews to justify new trials in response to funding policies
6 Current Position As of 15 August 2010, 376 (8.7%) of Cochrane reviews contained no included studies Within The CDSR, the number of empty reviews is increasing and is inconsistent across Review Groups
7 Date of First Publication of Empty Reviews as at 15 August 2010
8 Introduction Of the 376 (8.7%) empty Cochrane reviews, 25.3% did not list excluded studies, 90.2% did not list ongoing studies, 96.0% did not list studies waiting assessment, and 23.4% did not list any studies other than what was discussed in their background section Proportions of empty reviews differed between groups, from 0% to 26.9% CRG editors differed somewhat in their perspectives on empty reviews and on editorial guidance provided to authors of these reviews
9 Acute Respiratory Airways Anaesthesia Back Bone/Joint/Muscle Breast Cancer Childhood Cancer Colorectal Cancer Consumers Cys Fib/Gen Dis Dementia Dep/Anx/Neurosis Devel/Psych/Learn Drugs/Alcohol Ear/Nose/Throat Effective Pract/Org Epilepsy Eyes/Vision Fertility Reg GYN Cancer Blood Cancer Heart Hepato-Biliary HIV/AIDS Hypertension Incontinence Infectious Disease Bowel Disorders Injuries Lung Cancer Menstrual/Subfert Metab/Endocrine Methods Movement Dis Multiple Sclerosis Musculoskeletal Neonatal Neuromuscular Oral Health Pain/Palliative Peripheral Vascular Pregnancy/Birth Prostate/Urol Canc Public Health Renal Schizophrenia STDs Skin Stroke Tobacco Upper GI/Pancreas Wounds Proportion of Empty Reviews across CRGs (as of 15 August 2010)
10 Importance Empty reviews are important as they: Tell us who is undertaking the review and thus interested in the topic Highlight major research gaps Indicate the state of the evidence at a point in time Justify further research and/or funding Highlight potential harms
11 Frustrations Policy-makers and practitioners report frustration in locating a review only to find that it has no included studies and is of limited utility for clinical decisions Lang, Edwards & Flieszer (2007) suggested that authors of empty reviews note observations based on excluded studies so that decision-makers are not left empty handed
12 Also In the absence of included studies some authors use evidence from excluded studies for reporting implications for practice: basing their recommendations on the available evidence not necessarily the best evidence At present there is little guidance for reporting excluded studies in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions There is no guidance for reporting of empty reviews
13 Aims of the Empty Reviews Project To examine the way in which empty Cochrane reviews are reported To review current guidelines for reporting of empty reviews To develop suggestions for guidance for the conduct and reporting of empty reviews
14 Consider Current Guidance in the Cochrane Handbook With thanks to Julian Higgins MRC Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge Co-Editor, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 Note 1/2 Cochrane reviews should be scientific reviews and as such must not draw conclusions based on data that are not part of the review Such evidence suffers from all the problems of narrative reviews that we strive so hard to avoid If no reliable evidence is found, this needs to be reported clearly, and not middied with unreliable evidence If it is realised after the fact that reliable evidence was excluded, the reviewers got their eligibility criteria wrong in the first place You can t fix that by post hoc cherry picking
23 Note 2/2 We do need to think about the relevance of reviews to decision makers, who often want the best available evidence rather than the available good evidence Perhaps a paradigm shift is necessary, and many are working on this (e.g. NRSMG) But to revolve the discussion around empty reviews is not helpful
24 Reporting of Empty Reviews Lang et al. (2007) Suggest guidelines needed Propose that reviewers could note observations from ineligible articles and abstracts Green et al. (2007) Note that specific structure could be helpful Argue that basing conclusions on studies which do not meet inclusion criteria increases the risk of bias
25 How Do CRGs (and Others) Handle Empty Reviews? Identify policies & procedures on Determining publication of empty reviews Practice of handling excluded studies across Cochrane and other providers Informing practice based on empty reviews and excluded studies
26 Methods Survey with closed and open-ended questions 53 Cochrane Collaboration Review Groups WHO, JBI, What Works Clearinghouse and SCIE Coded & analyzed responses
27 Cochrane Groups Publishing Empty Reviews N=53
28 % of responses Rationale for Publishing Empty Reviews N=46
29 Other Providers WHO No policy on empty reviews They search for the best available evidence, and then make a recommendation based on what they find SCIE As the evidence base in social care is very limited, their policy is similar WWCH Review focus is changed depending on the evidence base, thus empty reviews are not generally produced
30 CRG Views about Including Empty Reviews Include to instigate further research Our aim with empty reviews is to raise the profile of the question and hopefully generate research leading to high quality evidence which we can then report quickly in an updated review. Include if good case made There may be benefit in amending the TRF form to include the line: If you think this review might be empty, please give your reasons why you feel it is important to do the review.
31 CRG Reasons for Not Publishing Empty Reviews Not worth time and resources a colossal waste of everyone s time and energy Influence on group s impact factor May be misleading Empty reviews (< 3 studies) can put positive supportive evidence from initial, low quality studies behind treatment Some groups have minimum # of studies stipulation - e.g., 2-3 BUT, question can still matter may be exceptions where review questions appear of great public health relevance
32 Handling Excluded Studies Standard Policy? Permitted in Review? Unknown 4% Yes 21% No 75% Yes 58% No 31% Unknown 11%
33 % of responses Conditions for Providing Evidence Based on Excluded Studies N=31
34 Further Considerations for Whether to Allow Excluded Studies Excluded based on intervention or outcomes? RCTs feasible/ethical for topic area? If not, lower grade studies may be acceptable Guidelines may be needed for application of evidence from excluded studies We dissuade authors from providing evidence from excluded studies because of inconsistency, which would lead to provision of evidence that is arbitrary and unsystematic.
35 Guidance for Implications for practice Section N=53 For Yes responses (n=7): Extra guidance but on case-by-case basis (3) General advice (2) Refer to other empty reviews, EPICOT, & extra advice (1) Group Methodologists give guidance (1)
36 Views about Priority on Updating Empty Reviews No, topic-based priority only: Priority is only given on the basis of importance of the review topic, not on whether there are included studies or not. Only if new study emerges: Aim to update/review them around the same time as other reviews, but if we became aware of a study relevant to an empty review, it would probably prompt a more rapid update.
37 Content Analysis of Implications for Practice in Empty Reviews
38 What We Wanted to Know Despite the lack of high quality, or any, evidence included in empty reviews, how do authors report implications for practice?
39 Objectives of the Content Analysis To explore the following: How authors frame discussions of Implications for Practice? Do authors incorporate information from other research? If so, how and where? Do authors make recommendations for practice?
40 Conceptual Definition of Recommendation We defined recommendations for practice as statements which instruct readers, including consumers, practitioners, or policy makers to do something
41 One Sentence Wonders 117 (31.1%) "None identified from this systematic review. Mention lack of evidence and review topic: No randomized controlled trials, which assessed the effectiveness or safety of oral immunoglobulin preparations for the treatment of rotavirus diarrhoea in hospitalized low birthweight infants were found. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence: "No relevant trials appear to have been published so this review concludes that there is no evidence of effect of leukotriene antagonists in bronchiectasis rather than evidence of no effect.
42 Vague Wording 26 (6.9%) - e.g. It is likely that clinicians will continue with their current practice, using clinical judgement and prescribing patterns to dictate treatment because there is no RCT-based evidence to help guide their choice of drug. It is difficult to know whether current practice is justified outside of a well designed, conducted and reported RCT. Currently policymakers have no RCT-based evidence upon which to base guidelines for HIVAN. They are likely to continue to rely on opinion and habit when making their recommendations. Funders of studies may wish to make this important subgroup of people a priority for future research.
43 Failure to Cite 50% of implications for practice sections make reference to evidence, only 16% of these cite its source The implications for fluid management in acute respiratory infections have not been studied in any RCTs to date. There is currently no evidence for or against increased fluids in acute respiratory infections. Nonexperimental (observational) data suggests that there may be a risk of symptomatic hyponatraemia due to increased antidiuretic hormone secretion in lower respiratory tract infections, particularly in children. The incidence in the primary care setting and the clinical significance of this observational data needs to be determined with further research, conducted as randomised controlled trials.
44 Targeted Discussions "1. For people with severe mental illness At present, the choice between dedicated supported housing schemes and outreach services is based on a combination of personal preference, professional judgement and availability of resources. Decisions of this nature should be made with the full understanding that no one intervention has been shown to be more effective than another in making a difference to symptoms, future use of services, quality of life or other measures of importance. Furthermore, the efficacy of supported housing remains untested. Participating in trials that test the effectiveness of such services should be encouraged. 2. For practitioners In the absence of evidence of their relative efficacy, decisions on the provision of alternative forms of accommodation and continued support for people with mental illness can only be based on a combination of professional judgement, patient preference and availability. This should be made clear to the patient or client who has to make this important decision. Practitioners may wish to actively support or participate in trials to test the effectiveness of supported housing schemes for people with severe mental illness. 3. For managers and policymakers Policies in favour of dedicated supported housing schemes should be viewed with some caution and should not be implemented without plans for evaluation using rigorous methods or should be delayed pending further evidence of their effectiveness. Forming alliances with researchers within this field may result in a fruitful collaboration that would not only inform local policies on this issue, but would also provide much needed evidence base on its effectiveness."
45 Implications for Practice with Recommendations 59 of 376 empty reviews (15.7%) appeared to contain recommendations Grouped as: generally supportive, recommending alternatives, or recommending either restricted use or non-use
46 Generally Favorable Recommendations Represent 23 of 59 (39.0%) empty reviews which appear to make recommendations 14 of these appear to have been based largely on other research cited in the background 7 seem to not be based on evidence, but on guidelines, theory, or absence of evidence of harm 2 seem to be based on excluded studies
47 Example of Generally Favorable Recommendation There is a need to raise awareness of the likely risks of waterpipe tobacco smoking worldwide. Particular attention should be devoted to examining empirically the potentially false perceptions about levels of dependence, disease and mortality associated with waterpipe tobacco smoking. Evidence-based information about waterpipe should be developed and disseminated in order to deglamourise and denormalise its use. Young people, especially women and girls in the Eastern Mediterranean Region, may be at higher risk of waterpipe use, and may need particular attention from healthcare workers. In the absence of policy research on waterpipe, and given what we know about its potential harmful effects, there is a need to include this tobacco use method in all tobacco control policy initiatives (e.g. bans on advertisement and sales to minors, taxation, warning labels, smokefree indoor air). Treatments of proven efficacy should be provided to help waterpipe smokers quit.
48 Recommendations to Use Something Else 8 (13.6%) of 59 empty reviews making recommendations Appear to be based on existing guidelines, practice standards, other research, or nothing readily apparent
49 Example of Recommendation to Use Something Else As there were no randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials identified, we cannot draw any conclusions on the benefits (or otherwise) of regular administration of vitamin A in people with cystic fibrosis. Until further data are available, country or region specific guidelines (e.g. UK CF Trust Nutrition Guidelines (CF Trust 2002)) on the use and monitoring of vitamin A in people with cystic fibrosis should be followed.
50 Recommendations for Restricted Use 13 (22.0%) of 59 empty reviews making recommendations Limits on use include use in some circumstances (1), possible use in some circumstances (1), minimal use (1), or use only in the context of a controlled trial (10) Appear to be based largely on evidence of harm, possibility of harm, or no readily apparent basis
51 Examples of Recommendations Restricted Use for Restricted Use There is no evidence so far that subjective barriers reduce wandering, and the possibility of harm (particularly psychological distress) cannot be excluded. If used, then subjective barriers should form part of a diverse approach to problem wandering, which may include the identification and definition of the problem in the individual, preventative activities such as exercise classes or occupational therapies, and improved communication between carer and wanderer. Restrict to Trials 2. For clinicians In the absence of reliable evidence, clinicians prescribing calcium channel blockers for people with tardive dyskinesia must balance the possible benefits against the potential adverse effects of the treatment. Calcium-channel blockers lower people s blood pressure and may even cause symptoms of tardive dyskinesia to increase. These drugs should really only be used in a situation where their effects are closely monitored, i.e. within a randomised experimental design that can be written up and disseminated in order to inform practice.
52 Recommendations to Not Use 15 (25.4%) of 59 empty reviews making a recommendation Appear to be based on lack of evidence, evidence of harm, or ongoing research where trials had been aborted
53 Example of Recommendation to Not Use Given the lack of evidence comparing hydralazine versus placebo for primary (essential) hypertension, hydralazine should not be recommended as monotherapy. Clinicians who wish to recommend hydralazine for their patients should understand that while hydralazine may reduce blood pressure (based on non-randomized cross-over trials), to the best of our knowledge, there are no known clinical studies which have associated the use of hydralazine with a reduction in all cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke. In addition, despite poor reporting of treatmentemergent adverse effects, clinicians must weigh the risks of potential serious side effects associated with the use of hydralazine, such as reflex tachycardia, hemolytic anemia, glomerulonephritis, vasculitis, as well as lupus-like syndrome against the potential benefits of blood pressure reduction with no proven beneficial effect on adverse cardiovascular outcomes.
54 Summary Implications for Practice sections differ widely across empty reviews Some Implications for Practice sections are very brief, while others are quite lengthy Some Implications for Practice sections are difficult to interpret or vaguely worded Many Implications for Practice sections appear to refer to research without a formal citation Whilst the majority of Implications for Practice sections do not make recommendations, some do
55 Some Good Practices Observed Clear statement on lack of included evidence Explanation of what that means, i.e., absence of evidence is not evidence of absence Appropriate comments on harms Description of limitations of excluded data Reference to related reviews (e.g., similar intervention/different population) with caveats to generalisability Consideration of economic issues
56 Where Has This Project Got to So Far? 1. Paper submitted outlining the issues surrounding empty reviews in The CDSR and the quantitative data presented here 2. Papers in preparation outlining the handling of empty reviews, how they are regarded and the qualitative data from CRGs and other systematic review producers 3. Website to collect views on the issues regarding need for guidance 4. Consensus meeting in June with stakeholders; feedback needed before proceeding further
57 Feedback and Guidance for Empty Reviews
58 Questions for Discussion How do we define an empty review? A systematic review that results in no included/eligible studies Empty reviews are suitable for/when : Important questions for practice or policy Trials are feasible Though may need to amend the protocol as part of an iterative process
59 Questions for Discussion Do we need guidance for conducting and reporting empty reviews? Yes, in these circumstances: 1- Reviews done and ready to report 2- Reviews in progress 3- Anticipating low evidence reviews 4- Updates Our Focus is #1, perhaps, with implications for #2-4
60 Completed Empty Reviews Should guidance be generic or organized by review question (e.g., parachute vs. RCTs unfound vs. side effects vs. trials inconceivable) or CRG? Guidance should be general to the whole collaboration
61 Which Sections of Empty Reviews Require Guidance? Abstract Main Results Brief sentence no evidence Author s Conclusion Brief sentence no evidence May highlight possible severe/prevalent adverse effects
62 Which Sections of Empty Reviews Require Guidance? Plain Language Summary Brief sentence no evidence Explain why empty, if appropriate, referring to eligibility criteria May highlight possible severe/prevalent adverse effects Summary of Findings Include even if empty
63 Which Sections of Empty Reviews Require Guidance? Background Objectives Methods Criteria for considering studies for this review Search methods for identification of studies Data collection and analysis Omit data collection/analysis sections Reference protocol
64 Which Sections of Empty Reviews Require Guidance? Results Description of studies Flow Diagram Results of the search Included studies Brief sentence no evidence On-going studies Excluded studies Usual text Do not report excluded results here Risk of bias in included studies Effects of interventions
65 Which Sections of Empty Reviews Require Guidance? Discussion Follow handbook subheadings Provide examples May discuss excluded study results, but Under heading Reference Discuss reason for exclusion Bookend with caveats Be brief
66 Which Sections of Empty Reviews Require Guidance? Author s conclusions Implications for practice Follow handbook no recommendations Add examples to Handbook Brief sentence no evidence Other evidence is not to be reported here General statements referring to local practice guidelines May flag severe/prevalent adverse effects Cite evidence Implications for research Signal for update (on-going, awaiting, etc.) General statement research needed/follow Handbook
67 Writing and Dissemination Strategies Standard Handbook applies Possible special addenda for empty reviews, section dependent (draft 2-3 pages to integrate) David Tovey editor training Colloquia workshops, editors meeting, etc. Website, webinars, etc. Other forums? Stand alone empty review reporting document?
68 Preliminary Considerations of Empty Reviews at Title Registration, at Protocol, in Progress, and at Update
69 Should Contingency Plans for Empty Reviews Be Defined in the Review TRF/Protocol? At TRF (Decision tree) 1. Trial feasible? Y/N 2. Aware of at least one possibly includable trial? Y/N 3. Important to review even if empty? At Protocol (Decision tree continued) Provide a contingency plan in case no eligible evidence?
70 Should empty reviews be flagged in the No Cochrane Library?
71 What are the views regarding the updating of empty reviews? Same general principles of updating apply
72 Any other points to consider?
73 The Cochrane Empty Reviews Project Funded by The Cochrane Opportunities Fund Paul Montgomery, University of Oxford Sally Hopewell, UK Cochrane Centre Joanne Yaffe, University of Utah Lindsay Shepard, University of Utah
Empty Reviews: A Description and Consideration of Cochrane Systematic Reviews with No Included Studies
: A Description and Consideration of Cochrane Systematic Reviews with No Included Studies Joanne Yaffe 1 *, Paul Montgomery 2, Sally Hopewell 3, Lindsay Dianne Shepard 1 1 College of Social Work, University
More informationAudit report of published abstracts and Summary of findings tables
Audit report of published abstracts and Summary of findings tables Abstract Screening Checklist Document prepared by: Access: Purpose of the paper: Decision required: Urgency: Resource implications: David
More informationThe Cochrane Library Impact Factor Data Pack
Attachment 2 The Cochrane Library Impact Factor Data Pack When considering the data presented below, please be aware of the following: The dataset we have used to generate impact factors for individual
More informationThe Cochrane Library Impact Factor Data Pack
The Cochrane Library Impact Factor Data Pack When considering the data presented below, please be aware of the following: The dataset we have used to generate impact factors for individual review groups
More informationThe Cochrane Library 2014 CRG Impact Factor and Usage report
The Cochrane Library 2014 CRG Impact Factor and Usage report When considering the citation data presented below, please be aware of the following: The data used to generate Impact Factors for individual
More informationThe Cochrane Collaboration
The Cochrane Collaboration Version and date: V1, 29 October 2012 Guideline notes for consumer referees You have been invited to provide consumer comments on a Cochrane Review or Cochrane Protocol. This
More informationCochrane Rehabilitation Report sullo stato attuale di Cochrane Rehabilitation field e prospettive future nell ottica di ISPRM
Cochrane Rehabilitation Report sullo stato attuale di Cochrane Rehabilitation field e prospettive future nell ottica di ISPRM Francesca Gimigliano, MD, PhD Cochrane Rehabilitation Communication Committee
More informationThe QUOROM Statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of systematic reviews
The QUOROM Statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of systematic reviews David Moher 1, Alessandro Liberati 2, Douglas G Altman 3, Jennifer Tetzlaff 1 for the QUOROM Group
More informationMadhukar Pai, MD, PhD Associate Professor Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Madhukar Pai, MD, PhD Associate Professor Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics McGill University, Montreal, Canada Email: madhukar.pai@mcgill.ca Readers often look to the Reviewers discussion and
More informationCochrane Collaboration: Current state and future directions
Cochrane Collaboration: Current state and future directions 6 March 2003 Mike Clarke UK Cochrane Centre and Cochrane Collaboration The Cochrane Collaboration is an international organisation that aims
More informationThe detection and management of pain in patients with dementia in acute care settings: development of a decision tool: Research protocol.
The detection and management of pain in patients with dementia in acute care settings: development of a decision tool: Research protocol. Aims and Objectives of the overall study The aim of this study
More informationStandards for the reporting of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews
Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) Standards for the reporting of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews 24 September 2012 Preface The standards below summarize proposed attributes
More informationCochrane Breast Cancer Group
Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Version and date: V3.2, September 2013 Intervention Cochrane Protocol checklist for authors This checklist is designed to help you (the authors) complete your Cochrane Protocol.
More informationAuthor s response to reviews
Author s response to reviews Title: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Music Therapy in Improving the Quality of Life of Palliative Care Patients: a Randomised Controlled Pilot and Feasibility Study Authors:
More informationUK National Screening Committee. Adult screening for COPD. 29 th June 2018
UK National Screening Committee Adult screening for COPD 29 th June 2018 Aim 1. To ask the UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) to make a recommendation, based on the evidence presented in this document,
More informationEPF s response to the European Commission s public consultation on the "Summary of Clinical Trial Results for Laypersons"
EPF s response to the European Commission s public consultation on the "Summary of Clinical Trial Results for Laypersons" August 2016 This document received funding under an operating grant from the European
More informationReducing waste in research
Reducing waste in research Paul Glasziou, Bond University www.crebp.net.au Lancet Adding Value, Reducing Waste 2014 www.researchwaste.net Five stages of waste in research http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2016/01/14/paul-glasziou-and-iain-chalmers-is-
More informationRound robin summary - March 2012 Co-payment for unlicensed drug Egg donation Recruitment and training of Lay members
Round robin summary - Co-payment for unlicensed drug Egg donation Recruitment and training of Lay members In January we received three round robin requests to the Network. Below are the requests followed
More informationEvidence-based medicine and guidelines: development and implementation into practice
Evidence-based medicine and guidelines: development and implementation into practice PD Dr D. Aujesky, MSc MER Médecin-adjoint Service de Médecine Interne CHUV 1 Goals To discuss the basics of evidence-based
More informationCochrane Musculoskeletal Group: Plain Language Summary (PLS) Guide for Authors
Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group: Plain Language Summary (PLS) Guide for Authors Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group, October 2011 Contents 1. About Cochrane Plain Language Summaries (PLS)... 2 Who is this guide
More informationThe UK Cochrane Centre. Trusted evidence. Informed decisions. Better Health.
The UK Cochrane Centre Trusted evidence. Informed decisions. Better Health. Who are we and what do we do? Click to edit Master subtitle style Who are we and what do we do? The original Cochrane Centre
More informationCYSTIC FIBROSIS. The condition:
CYSTIC FIBROSIS Both antenatal and neonatal screening for CF have been considered. Antenatal screening aims to identify fetuses affected by CF so that parents can be offered an informed choice as to whether
More informationAuthors face many challenges when summarising results in reviews.
Describing results Authors face many challenges when summarising results in reviews. This document aims to help authors to develop clear, consistent messages about the effects of interventions in reviews,
More informationIntroduction to Cochrane and Cochrane Rehabilitation
Introduction to Cochrane and Cochrane Rehabilitation Stefano Negrini 1. University of Brescia 2. IRCCS Fondazione Don Gnocchi, Milan 3. Cochrane Rehabilitation Director Trusted evidence. Informed decisions.
More informationEvidence Based Practice Position Statement
Ratified by OTNZ-WNA Council State Date: July 2002 Review date: 2006 Version no. 2 Occupational Therapy New Zealand Whakaora Ngangahau Aotearoa (OTNZ-WNA) Evidence Based Practice Position Statement Background
More informationWebinar 3 Systematic Literature Review: What you Need to Know
Webinar 3 Systematic Literature Review: What you Need to Know Camille Kolotylo RN, PhD Andrea Baumann RN, PhD Nursing Health Services Research Unit (NHSRU) McMaster University Date: Thursday May 29, 2014
More informationImproving reporting for observational studies: STROBE statement
Improving reporting for observational studies: STROBE statement Technical meeting on the reporting of human studies submitted for the scientific substantiation of health claims EFSA Parma 20 November 2013
More informationFree Will and Agency: A Scoping Review and Map
Kent State University From the SelectedWorks of Paul Fehrmann Summer August 6, 2015 Free Will and Agency: A Scoping Review and Map Paul Fehrmann, Kent State University - Kent Campus Available at: https://works.bepress.com/paul_fehrmann/9/
More informationSmoking cessation interventions and services
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guideline version (Final) Smoking cessation interventions and services [E] Evidence reviews for advice NICE guideline NG92 Evidence reviews FINAL These
More informationWhat is the Cochrane Collaboration? What is a systematic review?
1 What is the Cochrane Collaboration? What is a systematic review? Archie Cochrane (1909-1988) It is surely a great criticism of our profession that we have not organised a critical summary, by specialty
More informationEvidence-Based Reproductive Health Care Professor E. Oluwole Akande WHO Consultant
Evidence-Based Reproductive Health Care By Professor E. Oluwole Akande WHO Consultant At The Regional workshop on the Training of Core Group of RH Experts and sharing of RH best practices. Johannesburg,
More informationSafeguarding adults: mediation and family group conferences: Information for people who use services
Safeguarding adults: mediation and family group conferences: Information for people who use services The Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE) was established by Government in 2001 to improve social
More informationProfessional Development: proposals for assuring the continuing fitness to practise of osteopaths. draft Peer Discussion Review Guidelines
5 Continuing Professional Development: proposals for assuring the continuing fitness to practise of osteopaths draft Peer Discussion Review Guidelines February January 2015 2 draft Peer Discussion Review
More informationThe Stolen Years Mental Health and Smoking Action Report 22 April Emily James, Policy and Campaigns Officer
The Stolen Years Mental Health and Smoking Action Report 22 April 2016 Emily James, Policy and Campaigns Officer Emily.James@ash.org.uk Where we are now? Overview The Stolen Years: Mental Health and Action
More informationStandards for reporting Plain Language Summaries (PLS) for Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Reviews (interim guidance adapted from Methodological
s for reporting Plain Language Summaries (PLS) for Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Reviews (interim guidance adapted from Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) guidance
More information\ jar gon \ BUSTER. For research terms A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 1
\ jar gon \ BUSTER For research terms A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 1 The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) \ jar gon \ BUSTER This glossary provides lay language definitions
More informationGOVERNING BOARD. Assisted Conception (IVF): Review of access criteria. Date of Meeting 21 January 2015 Agenda Item No 13. Title
GOVERNING BOARD Date of Meeting 21 January 2015 Agenda Item No 13 Title Assisted Conception (IVF): Review of access criteria Purpose of Paper The SHIP (Southampton, Hampshire, Isle of Wight and Portsmouth)
More informationHow to use this appraisal tool: Three broad issues need to be considered when appraising a case control study:
CASP Checklist: 11 questions to help you make sense of a Case Control Study How to use this appraisal tool: Three broad issues need to be considered when appraising a case control study: Are the results
More informationTemplate for MECIR (Review)
Template for MECIR (Review) This guidance document contains information regarding the Cochrane Collaboration's mandatory MECIR Conduct and Reporting Standards and editorial suggestions specific to PaPaS,
More informationJelena Savović 1*, Laura Weeks 2, Jonathan AC Sterne 1, Lucy Turner 3, Douglas G Altman 4, David Moher 3,5 and Julian PT Higgins 1,6
Savović et al. Systematic Reviews 2014, 3:37 RESEARCH Open Access Evaluation of the Cochrane Collaboration s tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials: focus groups, online survey, proposed
More informationSystematic Reviews in healthcare and the Joanna Briggs Institute /Cochrane Collaboration. Fiona Bath-Hextall
Systematic Reviews in healthcare and the Joanna Briggs Institute /Cochrane Collaboration Fiona Bath-Hextall Fiona.bath-hextall@nottingham.ac.uk Remit The importance of Systematic Reviews Who uses systematic
More informationMinistry of Health and Long-Term Care. Palliative Care. Follow-Up on VFM Section 3.08, 2014 Annual Report RECOMMENDATION STATUS OVERVIEW
Chapter 1 Section 1.08 Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Palliative Care Follow-Up on VFM Section 3.08, 2014 Annual Report RECOMMENDATION STATUS OVERVIEW # of Status of Actions Recommended Actions
More informationWorkshop: Cochrane Rehabilitation 05th May Trusted evidence. Informed decisions. Better health.
Workshop: Cochrane Rehabilitation 05th May 2018 Trusted evidence. Informed decisions. Better health. Disclosure I have no conflicts of interest with anything in this presentation How to read a systematic
More informationNICE guidelines. Flu vaccination: increasing uptake in clinical risk groups and health and social care workers
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE NICE guidelines Equality impact assessment Flu vaccination: increasing uptake in clinical risk groups and health and social care workers The impact on
More informationHearing aid dispenser approval process review Introduction Hearing aid dispenser data transfer... 6
Hearing aid dispenser approval process review 2010 11 Content 1.0 Introduction... 4 1.1 About this document... 4 1.2 Overview of the approval process... 4 2.0 Hearing aid dispenser data transfer... 6 2.1
More informationPrioritising uncertainties assembled in UK DUETs, for additional research. NHS Evidence provided by NICE
Prioritising uncertainties assembled in UK DUETs, for additional research NHS Evidence provided by NICE James Lind Alliance Tackling treatment uncertainties together Patients and Clinicians James Lind,
More informationPROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews
PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews Preventing falls and associated mortality in older people: an umbrella review of systematic reviews Mukesh Dherani, Stefanie Buckner, Daniel
More informationConsistency in REC Review
National Research Ethics Advisors Panel Consistency in REC Review Summary 1. Consistency is taken to mean that, for any specific application or other, similar, applications, Research Ethics Committees
More informationINTERNATIONAL STILLBIRTH ALLIANCE STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AND GOALS FOR
INTERNATIONAL STILLBIRTH ALLIANCE STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AND GOALS FOR 2009-2013 This document outlines the mission, vision, guiding principles and strategic goals for ISA over the next 5 years. For more
More informationUsing natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions
Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions Peter Craig MRC Population Health Sciences Research Network Public Health Intervention Research Symposium Toronto, 29-30 November 2010
More informationDraft Regulation R-013: Spousal Exemption to Sexual Abuse Provisions and Draft Standard of Practice S-032: Providing Chiropractic Care to a Spouse
ONTARIO CHIROPRACTIC ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION CHIROPRATIQUE DE L ONTARIO March 26, 2015 Joel Friedman, Director, Policy and Research College of Chiropractors of Ontario 130 Bloor St. West, Suite 902 Toronto,
More informationIncluding Health Economics in Your Specific Aims and Approach
Including Health Economics in Your Specific Aims and Approach Ruanne V Barnabas, MD, DPhil Health Economics Impact Study Team (HEIST) Center for AIDS Research (CFAR) Outline Background Specific Aims Approach
More informationSystematic reviews vs. rapid reviews: What s the difference?
Systematic reviews vs. rapid reviews: What s the difference? Andrea C. Tricco PhD MSc Jesmin Antony, MSc Sharon E. Straus, MD MSc CADTH Rapid Review Summit Objectives To discuss the difference between
More informationPatient-Centered Cancer Treatment Planning: Improving the Quality of Oncology Care
Patient-Centered Cancer Treatment Planning: Improving the Quality of Oncology Care Carolyn M. Clancy, MD Director Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality IOM National Cancer Policy Forum and the National
More informationFramework on the feedback of health-related findings in research March 2014
Framework on the feedback of health-related findings in research March 2014 Summary Scope and background In the course of a study involving human participants, researchers may make a finding that has potential
More informationA Cochrane systematic review of interventions to improve hearing aid use
A Cochrane systematic review of interventions to improve hearing aid use Fiona Barker f.barker@surrey.ac.uk Department of Healthcare Management and Policy The context Hearing loss is a common long term
More informationCochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library)
A systematic review of smoking cessation and relapse prevention interventions in parents of babies admitted to a neonatal unit (after delivery) Divya Nelson, Sarah Gentry, Caitlin Notley, Henry White,
More informationThe Committee noted that the main issues raised in the challenge to the favourable opinion were as follows;
22 November 2016 South West - Frenchay Research Ethics Committee Level 3, Block B Whitefriars Lewins Mead, Bristol BS1 2NT Email: nrescommittee.southwest-frenchay@nhs.net Telephone: 0207 1048 045 Professor
More informationPROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews
PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews Health behaviour change in the community pharmacy setting: a realist review Aikaterini Kassavou, Liz Steed, Carol Rivas, Trisha Greenhalgh,
More informationCochrane: the next decade DAVID TOVEY
Cochrane: the next decade DAVID TOVEY EDITOR IN CHIEF Plan Why is evidence important? Introduction to Cochrane Challenges for systematic review producers Cochrane Strategy to 2020 Looking forward for evidence
More informationRoyal College of Radiologists (RCR) Referral guidelines. Final Accreditation Report. Guidance producer: Guidance product: Date: 29 June 2010
Guidance producer: Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) Guidance product: Referral guidelines Date: 29 June 2010 Final Accreditation Report Contents Introduction... 3 Accreditation recommendation... 3 Implementation...
More informationIdentify the benefits of using a Brief Negotiated Intervention (BNI) to screen for alcohol and drug disorders. Review a four step model of Screening,
Kate Speck, PhD Identify the benefits of using a Brief Negotiated Intervention (BNI) to screen for alcohol and drug disorders. Review a four step model of Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to
More informationNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL EXCELLENCE SCOPE. Dementia: the management of dementia, including the use of antipsychotic medication in older people
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL EXCELLENCE 1 Guideline title SCOPE Dementia: the management of dementia, including the use of antipsychotic medication in older people 1.1 Short title Dementia 2 Background
More informationRecovering Families: A Tool For Parents in Recovery August 1, 2016
Recovering Families: A Tool For Parents in Recovery August 1, 2016 Topics for discussion Challenges for parents in recovery Development of Recovering Families Sample pages and activities Evaluation efforts
More informationA proposal for collaboration between the Psychometrics Committee and the Association of Test Publishers of South Africa
A proposal for collaboration between the Psychometrics Committee and the Association of Test Publishers of South Africa 27 October 2015 Table of contents Introduction... 3 Overview of the Association of
More informationThe MASCC Guidelines Policy
The MASCC Guidelines Policy Recommendations for MASCC Guideline Construction and the Endorsement of Externally Generated Guidelines Preamble MASCC recognizes that providing supportive care facilitates
More informationInvolvement of consumers in studies run by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit (MRC CTU): Results of a survey
Involvement of consumers in studies run by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit (MRC CTU): Results of a survey Claire Vale, Lindsay Thompson, Claire Murphy, Silvia Forcat & Bec Hanley, MRC
More informationThey are updated regularly as new NICE guidance is published. To view the latest version of this NICE Pathway see:
Strategy,, policy and commissioning to delay or prevent ent of dementia, bring together everything NICE says on a topic in an interactive flowchart. are interactive and designed to be used online. They
More informationMapping A Pathway For Embedding A Strengths-Based Approach In Public Health. By Resiliency Initiatives and Ontario Public Health
+ Mapping A Pathway For Embedding A Strengths-Based Approach In Public Health By Resiliency Initiatives and Ontario Public Health + Presentation Outline Introduction The Need for a Paradigm Shift Literature
More informationSwiss national license for the Cochrane Library
Swiss national license for the Cochrane Library 4th National gathering of Swiss medical librarians Bern, September 9, 2016 Erik von Elm, MD MSc FMH Co-Director Cochrane Switzerland Institut universitaire
More informationPROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews
PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews Closed reduction methods for acute anterior shoulder dislocation [Cochrane Protocol] Kanthan Theivendran, Raj Thakrar, Subodh Deshmukh,
More informationEvaluation of the Type 1 Diabetes Priority Setting Partnership
Evaluation of the Type 1 Diabetes Priority Setting Partnership Introduction The James Lind Alliance (JLA) Type 1 Diabetes Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was established in 2010. The PSP began its process
More informationReviewer s report. Version: 0 Date: 17 Dec Reviewer: Julia Marcus. Reviewer's report:
Reviewer s report Title: Is there continued evidence for an association between abacavir usage and myocardial infarction risk in individuals with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)?: a cohort collaboration
More informationMeta-analyses: analyses:
Meta-analyses: analyses: how do they help, and when can they not? Lee Hooper Senior Lecturer in research synthesis & nutrition l.hooper@uea.ac.uk 01603 591268 Aims Systematic Reviews Discuss the scientific
More information[population] or for TREATMENT: [Intervention or intervention contrast] for [health problem] in [population] Review information
Model Review (Version 1.0): for PREVENTION: [Intervention] for prevention of [health... Page 1 of 28 Model Review (Version 1.0): for PREVENTION: [Intervention] for prevention of [health problem] in [population]
More informationSpecial guidelines for preparation and quality approval of reviews in the form of reference documents in the field of occupational diseases
Special guidelines for preparation and quality approval of reviews in the form of reference documents in the field of occupational diseases November 2010 (1 st July 2016: The National Board of Industrial
More informationNICE guideline Published: 6 July 2016 nice.org.uk/guidance/ng49
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD): assessment and management NICE guideline Published: 6 July 20 nice.org.uk/guidance/ng49 NICE 2017. All rights reserved. Subject to Notice of rights (https://www.nice.org.uk/terms-and-conditions#notice-ofrights).
More informationCORPORATE REPORT Communication strategy
CORPORATE REPORT Communication Strategy 2014-17 1 Introduction This strategy sets out the Commission s goals and objectives in relation to its communication activities for the next three years. It has
More informationEVIDENCE AND RECOMMENDATION GRADING IN GUIDELINES. A short history. Cluzeau Senior Advisor NICE International. G-I-N, Lisbon 2 November 2009
EVIDENCE AND RECOMMENDATION GRADING IN GUIDELINES A short history Françoise Cluzeau Senior Advisor NICE International G-I-N, Lisbon 2 November 2009 Long ago.. Before grading Evidence? Plato (3 rd Century
More informationAlcohol interventions in secondary and further education
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Guideline version (Draft for Consultation) Alcohol interventions in secondary and further education NICE guideline: methods NICE guideline Methods
More informationMRC Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research Gordon Murray, University of Edinburgh
Edinburgh All All Ireland Ireland North West Midlands MRC-CTSU - CTSU MRC MRC- - BSU ConDuCT MRC- - CTU MRC Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research Gordon Murray, University of Edinburgh www.methodologyhubs.mrc.ac.uk
More informationAccess to newly licensed medicines. Scottish Medicines Consortium
Access to newly licensed medicines Scottish Medicines Consortium Modifiers The Committee has previously been provided with information about why the SMC uses modifiers in its appraisal process and also
More informationSearching NHS EED and HEED to inform development of economic commentary for Cochrane intervention reviews
Searching NHS EED and HEED to inform development of economic commentary for Cochrane intervention reviews STUDY REPORT Ian Shemilt, Miranda Mugford, Luke Vale and Dawn Craig on behalf of the Campbell and
More informationApplying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings paper 4: how to assess coherence
Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings paper 4: how to assess coherence Fatemeh Rajabi Community Based Participatory research Center 1397 Definition 1. coherence : how clear
More informationImplementing Vitamin D Guidance. Final Minutes
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE Implementing Vitamin D Guidance 3 rd Meeting of the Public Health Advisory Committee A 4 th September 2013 Prince of Wales Suite, NICE Offices, London
More informationSystematic Reviews. Simon Gates 8 March 2007
Systematic Reviews Simon Gates 8 March 2007 Contents Reviewing of research Why we need reviews Traditional narrative reviews Systematic reviews Components of systematic reviews Conclusions Key reference
More informationAssessing the Risk: Protecting the Child
Assessing the Risk: Protecting the Child Impact and Evidence briefing Key findings is an assessment service for men who pose a sexual risk to children and are not in the criminal justice system. Interviews
More informationPROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews
PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous haematopoietic cell transplantation for children, adolescents and young adults with first
More informationTitle:The role of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in prostate, pancreatic and stomach cancers.
Author's response to reviews Title:The role of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in prostate, pancreatic and stomach cancers. Authors: Helen Cavanagh (helen21987@hotmail.com) Katherine MA Rogers (k.rogers@qub.ac.uk)
More informationEvidence-based Laboratory Medicine: Finding and Assessing the Evidence
Find Assess Decide Evidence-based Laboratory Medicine: Finding and Assessing the Evidence Pieter Vermeersch, M.D. Ph.D. Laboratory Medicine, UZ Leuven November 18th 2008 Introduction Archie Cochrane (1908-1988)
More informationCochrane Bone, Joint & Muscle Trauma Group How To Write A Protocol
A p r i l 2 0 0 8 Cochrane Bone, Joint & Muscle Trauma Group How To Write A Protocol This booklet was originally produced by the Cochrane Renal Group to make the whole process of preparing a protocol as
More informationPalliative and end of life care Priority Setting Partnership
Palliative and end of life care Priority Setting Partnership Putting patients, carers and clinicians at the heart of research Katherine Cowan, James Lind Alliance Dr Bill Noble, Marie Curie Palliative
More informationTalking about medicines to patients: the good the bad and the ugly
School of Healthcare FACULTY OF MEDICINE AND HEALTH Talking about medicines to patients: the good the bad and the ugly Improving the way we inform patients MUSN Meeting London, May 2016 DK Theo Raynor
More informationMENTAL CAPACITY ACT POLICY (England & Wales)
Stalbridge Surgery Reviewed June 2017 Next review date June 2018 INTRODUCTION MENTAL CAPACITY ACT POLICY (England & Wales) The Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 became fully effective on 1 st October 2007
More informationTitle: The impact of the UK 'Act FAST' stroke awareness campaign: content analysis of patients, witness and primary care clinicians' perceptions
Author's response to reviews Title: The impact of the UK 'Act FAST' stroke awareness campaign: content analysis of patients, witness and primary care clinicians' perceptions Authors: Stephan U Dombrowski
More informationHow do we identify a good healthcare provider? - Patient Characteristics - Clinical Expertise - Current best research evidence
BSC206: INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE LECTURE 1: INTRODUCTION TO EVIDENCE- BASED MEDICINE List 5 critical thinking skills. - Reasoning - Evaluating - Problem solving
More informationAppendix 2 Good Relations Action Plan, Outcomes, Timescales
Appendix 2 Appendix 2 Good Relations Action Plan, Outcomes, Timescales Theme 1 Increasing Visibility Develop a public statement on the Trust s commitment to challenging sectarianism and racism in all its
More informationPolicy: Client Involvement and Empowerment
Policy: Client Involvement and Empowerment Updated January 2017 Contents: 1. Introduction 2. How do we involve and empower those to whom we provide housing and/or support? 3. How do we involve and empower
More informationCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014 Impact Factor and Usage report
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014 Impact Factor and Usage report 1. The Impact Factor of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR): a) Each year in June, Thomson Reuters publish the
More informationGuidance on specifying the target difference ( effect size ) for a RCT
Guidance on specifying the target difference ( effect size ) for a RCT Jonathan Cook Centre for Statistics in Medicine & NDORMS, University of Oxford Aim & feedback Building upon exiting DELTA guidance
More information