Development of an efficient search filter to retrieve systematic reviews from PubMed

Oliván, José Antonio Salvador; Cuenca, Gonzalo Marco; Avilès, Rosario Arquero

doi:10.5195/jmla.2021.1223

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 60 publications

(96 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Filters for randomised trials in MEDLINE and EMBASE (sensitivity-and precision-maximising version) were adopted from the technical supplement to Chapter 4 of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (version 6.2) 19 . A high-sensitivity and precision PubMed search lter developed by Salvador-Oliván et al was used to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses for umbrella review 20 . This review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Table S1).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

SGLT2 Inhibitors in COVID-19: Umbrella Review, Meta-analysis, and Bayesian Sensitivity Assessment

Suresh,

Shamim,

Ghosh

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Several studies have reported a reduced risk of COVID-19-related mortality in patients taking antidiabetic medications. This is an umbrella review, meta-analysis, and Bayesian sensitivity assessment of SGLT2 inhibitors in COVID-19 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods: A search was conducted in the MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases on 5/12/2023. We performed an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on SGLT2i effects in T2DM patients with COVID-19 and critically appraised them using AMSTAR 2.0. Trials investigating SGLT2i use in COVID-19 patients post-hospitalisation and observational studies on prior SGLT2i use among COVID-19 patients were included in the meta-analysis, adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. Results: SGLT2 inhibitors exhibited significantly lower odds of mortality (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.53-0.84) and hospitalisation (OR 0.84, 0.75-0.94) in COVID-19 patients with T2DM. Bayesian sensitivity analyses corroborated most of the findings, with differences observed in hospitalisation and mortality outcomes. SGLT-2 inhibitors showed an OR of 1.20 (95% CI 0.64-2.27) for diabetic ketoacidosis. Publication bias was observed for hospitalisation but not for mortality. The GRADE assessment indicated a low to very low quality of evidence because of observational studies. Conclusions: Prophylactic use of SGLT2 inhibitors reduces mortality and hospitalization among COVID-19 patients, particularly in diabetic patients. The utility of SGLTi after hospitalization is uncertain and warrants further investigation. Limited efficacy has been observed under critical conditions. Individualized assessment is crucial before integration into COVID-19 management.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

SGLT2 Inhibitors in COVID-19: Umbrella Review, Meta-analysis, and Bayesian Sensitivity Assessment

Suresh,

Shamim,

Ghosh

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To identify potentially relevant peer-reviewed research papers, we developed a comprehensive systematic literature search strategy based on the terms used in the Grimshaw et al [ 9 ] and Boaz, Baeza and Fraser [ 8 ] overview articles. To ensure optimal retrieval, our search strategy was refined with support from an expert university librarian, considering the ongoing improvements in the development of search filters for systematic reviews since our first review [ 11 ]. We also wanted to include technology-related terms (e.g.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘It depends’: what 86 systematic reviews tell us about what strategies to use to support the use of research in clinical practice

Boaz,

Baeza,

Fraser

et al. 2024

Implementation Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The gap between research findings and clinical practice is well documented and a range of strategies have been developed to support the implementation of research into clinical practice. The objective of this study was to update and extend two previous reviews of systematic reviews of strategies designed to implement research evidence into clinical practice. Methods We developed a comprehensive systematic literature search strategy based on the terms used in the previous reviews to identify studies that looked explicitly at interventions designed to turn research evidence into practice. The search was performed in June 2022 in four electronic databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Epistemonikos. We searched from January 2010 up to June 2022 and applied no language restrictions. Two independent reviewers appraised the quality of included studies using a quality assessment checklist. To reduce the risk of bias, papers were excluded following discussion between all members of the team. Data were synthesised using descriptive and narrative techniques to identify themes and patterns linked to intervention strategies, targeted behaviours, study settings and study outcomes. Results We identified 32 reviews conducted between 2010 and 2022. The reviews are mainly of multi-faceted interventions (n = 20) although there are reviews focusing on single strategies (ICT, educational, reminders, local opinion leaders, audit and feedback, social media and toolkits). The majority of reviews report strategies achieving small impacts (normally on processes of care). There is much less evidence that these strategies have shifted patient outcomes. Furthermore, a lot of nuance lies behind these headline findings, and this is increasingly commented upon in the reviews themselves. Discussion Combined with the two previous reviews, 86 systematic reviews of strategies to increase the implementation of research into clinical practice have been identified. We need to shift the emphasis away from isolating individual and multi-faceted interventions to better understanding and building more situated, relational and organisational capability to support the use of research in clinical practice. This will involve drawing on a wider range of research perspectives (including social science) in primary studies and diversifying the types of synthesis undertaken to include approaches such as realist synthesis which facilitate exploration of the context in which strategies are employed.

show abstract

“…For the searches, we will use specialized terms and keywords related to violence (e.g., abuse*, maltreatment, neglect), children (e.g., child, infant*, kid*), and intervention/prevention (e.g., program, strategy, interven*) (see Additional file 1 for search strategy). We will filter the results to search for studies published after 2000 and for reviews, following the search filter presented by Salvador-Oliván and coauthors [ 25 ]. We will also search for additional reviews that met the inclusion criteria in published systematic reviews of reviews [ 20 , 22 , 26 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevention of violence against children in the home: an overview of reviews protocol

Cuartas

McCoy²,

Yoshikawa

et al. 2022

Syst Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Violence against children (VAC) in the home, or by household members, is a widespread problem with devastating and costly consequences for individuals and societies. In the past two decades, much research has been dedicated to the prevention of VAC in the home, in particular, in low- and- middle-income countries, but there are few systematic examinations of the growing body of literature. We present a protocol for an overview of reviews to synthesize the evidence from recent reviews on the effectiveness and characteristics of both universal and selective interventions to prevent VAC in the home or by household members. Methods We will conduct an overview of reviews of quantitative studies of universal and selective interventions to prevent VAC in the home published after 2000. Our outcomes will be VAC in the home (e.g., physical, sexual, or psychological violence or neglect) and drivers or direct risk factors for VAC (e.g., beliefs or attitudes towards VAC, parenting stress). We will search for reviews in multiple databases using controlled vocabularies and keywords. We will use the AMSTAR 2 to assess the quality of reviews and will extract information on outcomes, main results, and geographic distribution of primary studies, among other data. We will conduct a narrative synthesis of the findings. Discussion The proposed overview will provide timely evidence on effective strategies to prevent VAC in the home and will identify the key strengths and limitations of the current body of evidence on this topic. In doing so, we will inform future research, policy, and practice aimed at building effective strategies to prevent VAC globally. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42022304784.

show abstract

Development of an efficient search filter to retrieve systematic reviews from PubMed

Cited by 12 publications

References 60 publications

SGLT2 Inhibitors in COVID-19: Umbrella Review, Meta-analysis, and Bayesian Sensitivity Assessment

SGLT2 Inhibitors in COVID-19: Umbrella Review, Meta-analysis, and Bayesian Sensitivity Assessment

‘It depends’: what 86 systematic reviews tell us about what strategies to use to support the use of research in clinical practice

Prevention of violence against children in the home: an overview of reviews protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About