Not enough I say! Expand the remit of living systematic reviews to inform future research.

Published on Sep 11, 2017in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology6.437
· DOI :10.1016/J.JCLINEPI.2017.08.014
Alex J. Sutton103
Estimated H-index: 103
Sources
Abstract
References13
Newest
#1Julian Elliott (Monash University)H-Index: 60
#2Anneliese Synnot (La Trobe University)H-Index: 24
Last. James Thomas (UCL: University College London)H-Index: 56
view all 13 authors...
Systematic reviews are difficult to keep up to date, but failure to do so leads to a decay in review currency, accuracy, and utility. We are developing a novel approach to systematic review updating termed "Living systematic review" (LSR): systematic reviews that are continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. LSRs may be particularly important in fields where research evidence is emerging rapidly, current evidence is uncertain, and new research may change p...
Source
#1Steven Q. Simpson (KU: University of Kansas)H-Index: 26
#2Melissa Gaines (KU: University of Kansas)H-Index: 2
Last. Robert G. Badgett (KU: University of Kansas)H-Index: 18
view all 4 authors...
Abstract Studies and meta-analyses conflict regarding the use of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) for septic shock. We sought to clarify the conflict by performing a living systematic review and meta-regression. Methods We performed a meta-analysis and explored heterogeneity with meta-regression. We conformed with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist and qualified strength of evidence with a Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Eval...
Source
#1Hans Lund (University of Southern Denmark)H-Index: 30
#2Klara BrunnhuberH-Index: 4
Last. Iain ChalmersH-Index: 72
view all 10 authors...
To avoid waste of research, no new studies should be done without a systematic review of existing evidence, argue Hans Lund and colleagues
Source
#1Joshua R. PolaninH-Index: 28
#2Ryan Williams (AIR: American Institutes for Research)H-Index: 9
Individual participant data (IPD) is the backbone of scientific inquiry and important to a meta-analysis for a variety of reasons. It is therefore important to be able to access IPD, and yet, obstacles persist that make it difficult for meta-analysts, as well as interested primary study analysts, to obtain it. In this paper, we discuss the barriers to obtaining IPD via online repositories or contacting primary study authors and provide an example data sharing agreement that can be used to amelio...
Source
#1Paul Garner (LSTM: Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine)H-Index: 76
#2Sally Hopewell (University of Oxford)H-Index: 62
Last. Edward C. F. Wilson (University of Cambridge)H-Index: 27
view all 26 authors...
Updating of systematic reviews is generally more efficient than starting all over again when new evidence emerges, but to date there has been no clear guidance on how to do this. This guidance helps authors of systematic reviews, commissioners, and editors decide when to update a systematic review, and then how to go about updating the review.
Source
#1Richard D Riley (University of Birmingham)H-Index: 72
#2Paul C. Lambert (University of Leicester)H-Index: 63
Last. Ghada Abo-Zaid (University of Birmingham)H-Index: 6
view all 3 authors...
The use of individual participant data instead of aggregate data in meta-analyses has many potential advantages, both statistically and clinically. Richard D Riley and colleagues describe the rationale for an individual participant data meta-analysis and outline how to conduct this type of study
Source
#1Iain ChalmersH-Index: 72
#2Paul Glasziou (University of Oxford)H-Index: 139
“Research results should be easily accessible to people who need to make decisions about their own health... Why was I forced to make my decision knowing that information was somewhere but not available? Was the delay because the results were less exciting than expected? Or because in the evolving fi eld of myeloma research there are now new exciting hypotheses (or drugs) to look at? How far can we tolerate the butterfl y behaviour of researchers, moving on to the next fl ower well before the pr...
Source
#3David R. Jones (University of Leicester)H-Index: 28
Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide the highest level of evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions and as such underpin much of evidence-based medicine. Despite this, meta-analyses are usually produced as observational by-products of the existing literature, with no formal consideration of future meta-analyses when individual trials are being designed. Basing the sample size of a new trial on the results of an updated meta-analysis which will include it, may ...
Source
#1Lorcan Clarke (Cochrane Collaboration)H-Index: 5
#2Mike Clarke (Cochrane Collaboration)H-Index: 127
Last. Thomas Clarke (Cochrane Collaboration)H-Index: 2
view all 3 authors...
Objectives: To determine the extent to which reports of Cochrane reviews recommend the need for further research and, if so, the extent to which they make suggestions regarding that research.Methods: We examined all 2535 reviews in Issue 4, 2005 of The Cochrane Library. Each review was categorized on the basis of whether a suggestion was included about specific interventions, participants, or outcome measures that should be included in future research. We also identified the frequency with which...
Source
#2David R. Jones (University of Leicester)H-Index: 28
Background The importance of systematic reviews in identifying gaps in the evidence base and providing a quantitative basis for informing new research initiatives is widely acknowledged, but little is known about what actually happens in practice. Our objective was to assess the use made of results of reviews in the designing of new studies.Methods Of all Cochrane reviews published in 1996, those updated in 2002 or 2003 were identified. Authors of trials added in the updates were contacted and a...
Source
Cited By5
Newest
#1Pascal Probst (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 23
#2Felix J Hüttner (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 17
Last. Marco Del Chiaro (Anschutz Medical Campus)H-Index: 34
view all 45 authors...
BACKGROUND Pancreatic surgery is associated with considerable morbidity and, consequently, offers a large and complex field for research. To prioritize relevant future scientific projects, it is of utmost importance to identify existing evidence and uncover research gaps. Thus, the aim of this project was to create a systematic and living Evidence Map of Pancreatic Surgery. METHODS PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science were systematically searched for all...
Source
Source
#1Pascal Probst (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 23
#2Felix J Hüttner (Heidelberg University)H-Index: 17
Last. Markus K. DienerH-Index: 51
view all 11 authors...
Introduction Pancreatic surgery is a large and complex field of research. Several evidence gaps exist for specific diseases or surgical procedures. An overview on existing knowledge is needed to plan and prioritise future research. The aim of this project is to create a systematic and living evidence map of pancreatic surgery. Methods and analysis A systematic literature search in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be performed searching ...
Source
#1Jing LiH-Index: 1
#2Ming Liu (Lanzhou University)H-Index: 1
Last. Jun-Hai JiaH-Index: 1
view all 7 authors...
AbstractBackground:Anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) drugs treatment-related adverse events (AEs) are not uniform based on current study for patients with cancer. The study aimed to provide a complete toxicity profile and toxicity spectrum for anti-P
Source
#1Paul EnckH-Index: 64
#2Bjoern Horing (UHH: University of Hamburg)H-Index: 6
Last. Katja WeimerH-Index: 15
view all 4 authors...
Abstract This article addresses different ways to identify knowledge gaps in placebo research. Following a short description of the history of placebo research and our contributions, we describe the creation of the Journal of Interdisciplinary Placebo Studies (JIPS) literature database and compare its content (on a meta-level) with two other approaches to survey the current state of the art of placebo research: a bibliometric analysis of a (limited) selection of placebo papers, and the analysis ...
Source
This website uses cookies.
We use cookies to improve your online experience. By continuing to use our website we assume you agree to the placement of these cookies.
To learn more, you can find in our Privacy Policy.