A Narrative Review and Proposed Framework for Using Health System Data with Systematic Reviews to Support Decision-making

Presentation and outcomes of adrenal ganglioneuromas: A cohort study and a systematic review of literature

“…Therefore, we supplemented the systematic review with a review of AGN cases evaluated at our large tertiary academic centre. We followed the framework recommended by Lin et al 17 …”

Maternal and fetal outcomes in phaeochromocytoma and pregnancy: a multicentre retrospective cohort study and systematic review of literature

“…Considering the rare incidence of this condition, we followed the framework by Lin et al recommending a combination of an original observational study and a systematic review of the literature that identifies additional non-overlapping cases (22). Therefore, we combined an international retrospective multi-center study based on the newly founded International-Pheochromocytoma-and-Pregnancy-Registry of patients with PPGL and pregnancy occurring between 1980 and 2019 and a systematic review of literature conducted on studies published between January 1 st , 2005 to December 27 th , 2019 (Appendix Table 1, 2).…”

Integration of patient and clinician narratives into systematic reviews: An applied proof of concept

“…In a recent article, Grob et al [7] noted that incorporation of narratives of patient experiences in outpatient care into quality improvement efforts shows promise for conveying actionable information to clinicians and administrators. Lin et al [6] recently suggested that integration of health system data with traditional systematic reviews may help overcome decisional uncertainty for healthcare decision-makers by improving applicability of evidence or to support the implementation of the evidence. In our case, the narrative product integrates qualitative rather than quantitative information in an analogous way, that is, in an effort to improve applicability of the review findings and to offer stakeholder perspectives and experiences that may foster implementation.…”

“…Studies have found that health care managers and policy-makers underutilize traditional systematic reviews, in part, due to lack of specific clinical recommendations and implementation strategies [1][2][3][4]. Traditional systematic reviews, which prioritize findings from randomized controlled trials, are often insufficient in addressing contextual details that can make implementation more likely to succeed [5,6]. Further, while investigators have demonstrated that including patient perspectives in quality improvement efforts can increase clinically actionable findings [7], the "voices" of patients and frontline clinicians are typically absent from evidence-synthesis processes and reports.…”