The Systematic Review Data Repository (SRDR): descriptive characteristics of publicly available data and opportunities for research.
Journal
Systematic reviews
ISSN: 2046-4053
Titre abrégé: Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101580575
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 12 2019
20 12 2019
Historique:
received:
29
03
2019
accepted:
04
12
2019
entrez:
22
12
2019
pubmed:
22
12
2019
medline:
17
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Conducting systematic reviews ("reviews") requires a great deal of effort and resources. Making data extracted during reviews available publicly could offer many benefits, including reducing unnecessary duplication of effort, standardizing data, supporting analyses to address secondary research questions, and facilitating methodologic research. Funded by the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the Systematic Review Data Repository (SRDR) is a free, web-based, open-source, data management and archival platform for reviews. Our specific objectives in this paper are to describe (1) the current extent of usage of SRDR and (2) the characteristics of all projects with publicly available data on the SRDR website. We examined all projects with data made publicly available through SRDR as of November 12, 2019. We extracted information about the characteristics of these projects. Two investigators extracted and verified the data. SRDR has had 2552 individual user accounts belonging to users from 80 countries. Since SRDR's launch in 2012, data have been made available publicly for 152 of the 735 projects in SRDR (21%), at a rate of 24.5 projects per year, on average. Most projects are in clinical fields (144/152 projects; 95%); most have evaluated interventions (therapeutic or preventive) (109/152; 72%). The most frequent health areas addressed are mental and behavioral disorders (31/152; 20%) and diseases of the eye and ocular adnexa (23/152; 15%). Two-thirds of the projects (104/152; 67%) were funded by AHRQ, and one-sixth (23/152; 15%) are Cochrane reviews. The 152 projects each address a median of 3 research questions (IQR 1-5) and include a median of 70 studies (IQR 20-130). Until we arrive at a future in which the systematic review and broader research communities are comfortable with the accuracy of automated data extraction, re-use of data extracted by humans has the potential to help reduce redundancy and costs. The 152 projects with publicly available data through SRDR, and the more than 15,000 studies therein, are freely available to researchers and the general public who might be working on similar reviews or updates of reviews or who want access to the data for decision-making, meta-research, or other purposes.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Conducting systematic reviews ("reviews") requires a great deal of effort and resources. Making data extracted during reviews available publicly could offer many benefits, including reducing unnecessary duplication of effort, standardizing data, supporting analyses to address secondary research questions, and facilitating methodologic research. Funded by the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the Systematic Review Data Repository (SRDR) is a free, web-based, open-source, data management and archival platform for reviews. Our specific objectives in this paper are to describe (1) the current extent of usage of SRDR and (2) the characteristics of all projects with publicly available data on the SRDR website.
METHODS
We examined all projects with data made publicly available through SRDR as of November 12, 2019. We extracted information about the characteristics of these projects. Two investigators extracted and verified the data.
RESULTS
SRDR has had 2552 individual user accounts belonging to users from 80 countries. Since SRDR's launch in 2012, data have been made available publicly for 152 of the 735 projects in SRDR (21%), at a rate of 24.5 projects per year, on average. Most projects are in clinical fields (144/152 projects; 95%); most have evaluated interventions (therapeutic or preventive) (109/152; 72%). The most frequent health areas addressed are mental and behavioral disorders (31/152; 20%) and diseases of the eye and ocular adnexa (23/152; 15%). Two-thirds of the projects (104/152; 67%) were funded by AHRQ, and one-sixth (23/152; 15%) are Cochrane reviews. The 152 projects each address a median of 3 research questions (IQR 1-5) and include a median of 70 studies (IQR 20-130).
CONCLUSIONS
Until we arrive at a future in which the systematic review and broader research communities are comfortable with the accuracy of automated data extraction, re-use of data extracted by humans has the potential to help reduce redundancy and costs. The 152 projects with publicly available data through SRDR, and the more than 15,000 studies therein, are freely available to researchers and the general public who might be working on similar reviews or updates of reviews or who want access to the data for decision-making, meta-research, or other purposes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31862012
doi: 10.1186/s13643-019-1250-y
pii: 10.1186/s13643-019-1250-y
pmc: PMC6925515
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
334Subventions
Organisme : Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US)
ID : HHSA290201500002I_HHSA29032012T
Pays : International
Références
Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 3;5(1):185
pubmed: 27809924
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Jun;86:39-50
pubmed: 28529187
Syst Rev. 2012 Feb 21;1:15
pubmed: 22588052
Res Synth Methods. 2019 Mar;10(1):72-82
pubmed: 30561081
Res Synth Methods. 2019 Mar;10(1):2-14
pubmed: 30325115
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Nov;91:23-30
pubmed: 28912002
Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 11;8(1):70
pubmed: 30857554
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016 Feb 09;16:15
pubmed: 26857112
Syst Rev. 2018 Nov 17;7(1):195
pubmed: 30447694
PLoS One. 2014 May 29;9(5):e97886
pubmed: 24874700
Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 20;7(1):32
pubmed: 29463298
Res Synth Methods. 2018 Mar;9(1):2-12
pubmed: 29057573
PLoS One. 2016 Dec 8;11(12):e0165903
pubmed: 27930662
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2017 Sep 1;135(9):933-940
pubmed: 28772305
J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Nov;115:77-89
pubmed: 31302205
Milbank Q. 2016 Sep;94(3):485-514
pubmed: 27620683
PLoS Med. 2016 May 24;13(5):e1002028
pubmed: 27218655
Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 22;5(1):196
pubmed: 27876082
J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Feb;70:164-75
pubmed: 26408357
J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Nov;115:25-34
pubmed: 31276781
Lancet. 2011 Jan 8;377(9760):108-9
pubmed: 20630580
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2019 Jul 1;137(7):775-785
pubmed: 31070698
Syst Rev. 2012 Feb 09;1:7
pubmed: 22588008
J Acad Nutr Diet. 2019 Mar;119(3):375-393
pubmed: 29685825
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Feb 11;20(1):30
pubmed: 32046643
PLoS Biol. 2015 Oct 02;13(10):e1002264
pubmed: 26431313
JAMA. 1995 Feb 1;273(5):408-12
pubmed: 7823387
Syst Rev. 2015 Jun 15;4:78
pubmed: 26073888
Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 25;7(1):18
pubmed: 29368631
Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 09;7(1):3
pubmed: 29316980
Ann Surg. 2013 May;257(5):818-23
pubmed: 23407296
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2018 Oct 1;136(10):1170-1179
pubmed: 30128547
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Feb 17;162(4):287-94
pubmed: 25686168
Rev Med Chil. 2016 Jan;144(1):11-3
pubmed: 26998977