Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II

Silva, Valter; Grande, Antônio José; Carvalho, Alan Pedrosa Viegas de; Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera; Riera, Rachel

doi:10.1590/1516-3180.2013.8150015

Cited by 34 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 60 publications

(144 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“… Article describing methods for overviews • Presents tabular methods to deal with the preparation of overview evidence • Discusses the data extraction process and organisation of data • Presents a table of taxonomy of outcomes from the included SRs, and a data extraction table based on this taxonomy ✓✓ ✓✓ Salanti 2011 [ 3 ] Evolution of Cochrane intervention reviews and overviews of reviews to better accommodate comparisons among multiple interventions. Guidance for undertaking overviews • Provides Cochrane guidance on the definition of an overviews and as compared to SRs • Suggests broadening the search in an overview to include individual studies • Suggests missing data should be retrieved from original reports ✓✓ ✓✓ ✓✓ ✓ Silva 2015 [ 55 ] Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Study examining methods used in a cohort of overviews • Examines a cohort of Cochrane reviews for methods used • Documented the sources and types of search strategies conducted ✓✓ Singh 2012 [ 56 ] Development of the Metareview Assessment of Reporting Quality (MARQ) Checklist.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…conference databases, government websites)) Becker 2008 [ 1 ]; Baker 2014 [ 29 ]; Caird 2015 [ 31 ]; Cooper 2012 [ 32 ]; Hartling 2012 [ 35 ]; 2014 [ 37 ]; James 2014 [ 39 ]; JBI 2015 [ 40 , 41 ]; Li 2012 [ 44 ]; Pieper 2012 [ 6 , 45 ]; Pieper 2014 [ 47 ]; Silva 2015 [ 55 ]; Smith 2011 [ 57 ]; Thomson 2013 [ 59 ]; Whitlock 2008 [ 49 – 51 ] 1.1.2 Select other types of sources (e.g. reference checking, forward citation searching, handsearching key journals) a Cooper 2012 [ 32 ]; Hartling 2012 [ 35 ]; JBI 2015 [ 40 , 41 ]; Li 2012 [ 44 ]; Smith 2011 [ 57 ] 1.1.3 Select a combination of 1.1.1–1.1.2 Cooper 2012 [ 32 ]; Hartling 2012 [ 35 ]; JBI 2015 [ 40 , 41 ]; Silva 2015 [ 55 ]; Smith 2011 [ 57 ]; Whitlock 2008 [ 48 – 52 ] 2.0 Plan the search strategy for retrieval of SRs 2.1 Determine the search filter to use in general databases 2.1.1 Select a published SR filter (e.g. EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed) Cooper 2012 [ 32 ]; CMIMG 2012 [ 4 ]; JBI 2015 [ 40 , 41 ]; Robinson 2016 [ 48 – 52 ]; Smith 2011 [ 57 ] ▪ Montori 2006 SR filter (Cooper 2012 [ 32 ]) ...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Toward a comprehensive evidence map of overview of systematic review methods: paper 1—purpose, eligibility, search and data extraction

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundOverviews of systematic reviews attempt to systematically retrieve and summarise the results of multiple systematic reviews. Methods for conducting, interpreting and reporting overviews are in their infancy. To date, there has been no evidence map of the methods used in overviews, thus making it difficult to determine the gaps and priorities for methods research. Our objectives were to develop and populate a comprehensive framework of methods for conducting, interpreting and reporting overviews (stage I) and to create an evidence map by mapping studies that have evaluated overview methods to the framework (stage II).MethodsWe searched methods collections (e.g. Cochrane Methodology Register, Meth4ReSyn library, AHRQ Effective Health Care Program) to identify eligible studies for both stages of this research. In stage I, cross-sectional studies, guidance documents and commentaries that described methods proposed for, or used in, overviews were used to develop and populate the framework of methods. Drafts and multiple iterations of the framework were discussed and refined by all authors. In stage II, we identified and described studies evaluating overview methods and mapped these evaluations to the framework.ResultsIn this paper, we present results for the four initial steps of conducting an overview: (a) specification of the purpose, objectives and scope, (b) specification of the eligibility criteria, (c) search methods and (d) data extraction. Twenty-nine studies mentioned or described methods relevant to one or more of these steps. In the developed framework, identified methods and approaches were grouped according to the steps an overview author would need to undertake. Fifteen studies evaluated identified methods, all of which mapped to the search methods step. These studies either reported the development and evaluation of a new search filter to retrieve systematic reviews or compared the performance of multiple filters.ConclusionGaps in the evaluation of methods were found for the majority of steps in the framework. More empirical studies are needed to evaluate the methods outlined and provide a comprehensive evidence map. The framework is useful for planning these evaluations and for planning methods required to deal with challenges that arise when conducting an overview.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-017-0617-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a comprehensive evidence map of overview of systematic review methods: paper 1—purpose, eligibility, search and data extraction

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An umbrella review evaluates and integrates the results of multiple systematic reviews in order to enhance comprehensibility, reduce ambiguities, identify potential gaps in knowledge and summarize with an overarching reference publication the fundamental information on the topic of interest (Silva et al . 2012, 2015). Therefore, an umbrella review approach was used in an attempt to define categorically whether evidence of an association between CVDs and AP could be established from the existing literature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association between cardiovascular diseases and apical periodontitis: an umbrella review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The existence of an association between cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and apical periodontitis (AP) remains unclear because results obtained from previous clinical studies and reviews are inconsistent or inconclusive. Objective To conduct an umbrella review to determine whether there is an association between CVDs and the prevalence of AP in adults. Methods The protocol of the review was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42020185753). The literature search was conducted using the following electronic databases: Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science Scopus, PubMed and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, from inception to May, 2020, with no language restrictions. Systematic reviews with or without meta‐analysis that evaluated the association between CVDs and AP were included. Other types of studies, including narrative reviews, were excluded. Two reviewers independently performed a literature search, data extraction and quality assessment of included studies. Any disagreements or doubts were resolved by a third reviewer. The quality of the reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 tool (A measurement tool to assess systematic reviews), with 16 items. A final categorization of the systematic reviews classified each as of ‘high’, ‘moderate’, ‘low’ or ‘critically low’ quality. Results Four systematic reviews were included in the current review. Three reviews were graded by AMSTAR 2 as ‘moderate’ quality, whereas one review was graded as ‘critically low’ quality. Discussion Only one systematic review included a meta‐analysis. Substantial heterogeneity amongst the primary studies included within each systematic review was notable in preventing a pooled analysis. Conclusions From the limited ‘moderate’ to ‘critically low’ quality evidence available, the current umbrella review concluded that a weak association exists between CVDs and AP. In the future, well‐designed, longitudinal clinical studies with long‐term follow‐up are required.

show abstract

“…To answer these questions, we will conduct an overview of systematic reviews to compile evidence from multiple systematic reviews into an accessible document in order to guide and add power to decision-making. 34 Therefore, in this review we will critically appraise the current literature, explore how to incorporate our findings into usual practice and support health worker and policy decisions regarding choice of intervention.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies to improve adherence to antiretroviral therapy and retention in care for people living with HIV in high-income countries: a protocol for an overview of systematic reviews

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionWhile access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) for people living with HIV has expanded in recent years, additional efforts are required to support adherence to medication and retention in care. Interventions should be applicable in real-world settings and amenable to widespread use. The objectives of this overview are to identify effective pragmatic interventions that increase adherence to ART and retention in care for people living with HIV at high risk for suboptimal adherence and retention in high-income countries.Methods and analysisWe will conduct an overview of systematic reviews of studies on interventions which target improved adherence to medication and retention in care among high-risk people living with HIV in high-income countries (men who have sex with men, African, Caribbean and black people, sex workers, people who inject drugs, indigenous people and other socially marginalised groups). We will search the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE (Exerpta Medica Database), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), PsycINFO, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. We will conduct screening, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality of the systematic reviews. Analysis will be narrative. Our findings will be interpreted in light of the certainty of the evidence, level of pragmatism, setting and population of interest.Ethics and disseminationOnly published secondary data will be used in this study, and therefore ethics approval is not required. Our findings will be disseminated as peer-reviewed manuscripts, conference abstracts and through community activities. The findings from this overview will inform a mixed-methods study among people living with HIV and health workers in Ontario, Canada.

show abstract

Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II

Cited by 34 publications

References 60 publications

Toward a comprehensive evidence map of overview of systematic review methods: paper 1—purpose, eligibility, search and data extraction

Toward a comprehensive evidence map of overview of systematic review methods: paper 1—purpose, eligibility, search and data extraction

Association between cardiovascular diseases and apical periodontitis: an umbrella review

Strategies to improve adherence to antiretroviral therapy and retention in care for people living with HIV in high-income countries: a protocol for an overview of systematic reviews

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About