Combining abbreviated literature searches with single-reviewer screening: three case studies of rapid reviews.

Humans Publications Research Design Review Literature as Topic
Evidence synthesis Health care decision-making Rapid review Systematic review

Journal

Systematic reviews
ISSN: 2046-4053
Titre abrégé: Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101580575

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
18 07 2020
Historique:
received: 03 02 2020
accepted: 24 06 2020
entrez: 20 7 2020
pubmed: 20 7 2020
medline: 25 6 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Decision-makers increasingly request rapid answers to clinical or public health questions. To save time, personnel, and financial resources, rapid reviews streamline the methodological steps of the systematic review process. We aimed to explore the validity of a rapid review approach that combines a substantially abbreviated literature search with a single-reviewer screening of abstracts and full texts using three case studies. We used a convenience sample of three ongoing Cochrane reviews as reference standards. Two reviews addressed oncological topics and one addressed a public health topic. For each of the three topics, three reviewers screened the literature independently. Our primary outcome was the change in conclusions between the rapid reviews and the respective Cochrane reviews. In case the rapid approach missed studies, we recalculated the meta-analyses for the main outcomes and asked Cochrane review authors if the new body of evidence would change their original conclusion compared with the reference standards. Additionally, we assessed the sensitivity of the rapid review approach compared with the results of the original Cochrane reviews. For the two oncological topics (case studies 1 and 2), the three rapid reviews each yielded the same conclusions as the Cochrane reviews. However, the authors would have had less certainty about their conclusion in case study 2. For case study 3, the public health topic, only one of the three rapid reviews led to the same conclusion as the Cochrane review. The other two rapid reviews provided insufficient information for the authors to draw conclusions. Using the rapid review approach, the sensitivity was 100% (3 of 3) for case study 1. For case study 2, the three rapid reviews identified 40% (4 of 10), 50% (5 of 10), and 60% (6 of 10) of the included studies, respectively; for case study 3, the respective numbers were 38% (8 of 21), 43% (9 of 21), and 48% (10 of 21). Within the limitations of these case studies, a rapid review approach that combines abbreviated literature searches with single-reviewer screening may be feasible for focused clinical questions. For complex public health topics, sensitivity seems to be insufficient.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Decision-makers increasingly request rapid answers to clinical or public health questions. To save time, personnel, and financial resources, rapid reviews streamline the methodological steps of the systematic review process. We aimed to explore the validity of a rapid review approach that combines a substantially abbreviated literature search with a single-reviewer screening of abstracts and full texts using three case studies.
METHODS
We used a convenience sample of three ongoing Cochrane reviews as reference standards. Two reviews addressed oncological topics and one addressed a public health topic. For each of the three topics, three reviewers screened the literature independently. Our primary outcome was the change in conclusions between the rapid reviews and the respective Cochrane reviews. In case the rapid approach missed studies, we recalculated the meta-analyses for the main outcomes and asked Cochrane review authors if the new body of evidence would change their original conclusion compared with the reference standards. Additionally, we assessed the sensitivity of the rapid review approach compared with the results of the original Cochrane reviews.
RESULTS
For the two oncological topics (case studies 1 and 2), the three rapid reviews each yielded the same conclusions as the Cochrane reviews. However, the authors would have had less certainty about their conclusion in case study 2. For case study 3, the public health topic, only one of the three rapid reviews led to the same conclusion as the Cochrane review. The other two rapid reviews provided insufficient information for the authors to draw conclusions. Using the rapid review approach, the sensitivity was 100% (3 of 3) for case study 1. For case study 2, the three rapid reviews identified 40% (4 of 10), 50% (5 of 10), and 60% (6 of 10) of the included studies, respectively; for case study 3, the respective numbers were 38% (8 of 21), 43% (9 of 21), and 48% (10 of 21).
CONCLUSIONS
Within the limitations of these case studies, a rapid review approach that combines abbreviated literature searches with single-reviewer screening may be feasible for focused clinical questions. For complex public health topics, sensitivity seems to be insufficient.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1186/s13643-020-01413-7 PMID: 32682442 PMC: PMC7368980
pubmed: 32682442
doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01413-7
pii: 10.1186/s13643-020-01413-7
pmc: PMC7368980
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

162

Références

Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 22;5(1):197
pubmed: 27876092
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;(1):CD003506
pubmed: 11869665
Health Res Policy Syst. 2016 Nov 25;14(1):83
pubmed: 27884208
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Jun 11;6:CD003506
pubmed: 31194882
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Apr;96:23-34
pubmed: 29258906
Syst Rev. 2015 Mar 14;4:26
pubmed: 25874967
J Med Libr Assoc. 2005 Jan;93(1):97-103
pubmed: 15685281
Am J Prev Med. 2018 Jan;54(1S1):S19-S25
pubmed: 29254522
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 15;11:CD011135
pubmed: 29139110
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jul 12;7:CD012556
pubmed: 30001476
PLoS One. 2016 Dec 8;11(12):e0165903
pubmed: 27930662
Res Synth Methods. 2017 Dec;8(4):475-484
pubmed: 28703492
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Oct;102:1-11
pubmed: 29864540
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Feb 26;16(1):17
pubmed: 29482643
J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Jun;66(6):660-5
pubmed: 23419611
BMC Med. 2015 Sep 16;13:224
pubmed: 26377409
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Aug;88:148-153
pubmed: 28625563
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Sep 11;(9):CD011247
pubmed: 26360970
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 May;121:81-90
pubmed: 32004673
Health Info Libr J. 2014 Dec;31(4):303-13
pubmed: 25134780
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Aug 14;17(1):121
pubmed: 28806999
Res Synth Methods. 2016 Dec;7(4):433-446
pubmed: 27285733
Stat Med. 2002 Jun 15;21(11):1635-40
pubmed: 12111924
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Apr;96:133-142
pubmed: 29103958
J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Sep;68(9):1076-84
pubmed: 26279401
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Jun 28;19(1):132
pubmed: 31253092

Auteurs

Lisa Affengruber (L)

Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Cochrane Austria, Danube University Krems, Dr. Karl Dorrek Strasse 30, 3500, Krems, Austria. lisa.affengruber@donau-uni.ac.at.
Department of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Peter Debyeplein 1, 6229, HA, Maastricht, The Netherlands. lisa.affengruber@donau-uni.ac.at.
ORCID: 0000-0002-7721-8732

Gernot Wagner (G)

Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Cochrane Austria, Danube University Krems, Dr. Karl Dorrek Strasse 30, 3500, Krems, Austria.

Siw Waffenschmidt (S)

Information Management Unit, Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), Im Mediapark 8, 50670, Cologne, Germany.

Stefan K Lhachimi (SK)

Research Group Evidence-Based Public Health, Leibniz Institute for Epidemiology and Prevention Research (BIPS), Bremen, Germany.
Health Sciences Bremen, Institute for Public Health and Nursing, University of Bremen, Achterstraße 30, 28359, Bremen, Germany.

Barbara Nussbaumer-Streit (B)

Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Cochrane Austria, Danube University Krems, Dr. Karl Dorrek Strasse 30, 3500, Krems, Austria.

Kylie Thaler (K)

Medical Department I, Hanusch Krankenhaus der Wiener Gebietskrankenkasse, Heinrich-Collin-Straße 30, 1140, Vienna, Austria.

Ursula Griebler (U)

Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Cochrane Austria, Danube University Krems, Dr. Karl Dorrek Strasse 30, 3500, Krems, Austria.

Irma Klerings (I)

Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Cochrane Austria, Danube University Krems, Dr. Karl Dorrek Strasse 30, 3500, Krems, Austria.

Gerald Gartlehner (G)

Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Cochrane Austria, Danube University Krems, Dr. Karl Dorrek Strasse 30, 3500, Krems, Austria.
RTI International, 3040 Cornwallis Road, PO Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709-2194, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female

Evaluation of Low-Value Services Across Major Medicare Advantage Insurers and Traditional Medicare.

Ciara Duggan, Adam L Beckman, Ishani Ganguli et al.
1.00
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C

Effectiveness of Virtual Yoga for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Hallie Tankha, Devyn Gaskins, Amanda Shallcross et al.
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH

questionsmedicales.fr › Eucaryotes › Animaux › Chordés › Vertébrés › Mammifères › Eutheria › Primates › Haplorhini › Catarrhini › Hominidae › Humains › Combining abbreviated literature searches with...
questionsmedicales.fr › Sciences de l'information › Sources d'information › Moyens de communication › Publications › Combining abbreviated literature searches with...
questionsmedicales.fr › Disciplines des sciences naturelles › Science › Recherche › Plan de recherche › Combining abbreviated literature searches with...
questionsmedicales.fr › Sciences de l'information › Sources d'information › Moyens de communication › Publications › Littérature de revue comme sujet › Combining abbreviated literature searches with...