Cargando…

Delphi survey on the most promising areas and methods to improve systematic reviews’ production and updating

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews (SRs) are invaluable evidence syntheses, widely used in biomedicine and other scientific areas. Tremendous resources are being spent on the production and updating of SRs. There is a continuous need to automatize the process and use the workforce and resources to make...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mahmić-Kaknjo, Mersiha, Tomić, Vicko, Ellen, Moriah E., Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara, Sfetcu, Raluca, Baladia, Eduard, Riva, Nicoletta, Kassianos, Angelos P., Marušić, Ana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10042663/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36973729
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02223-3
_version_ 1784912978329468928
author Mahmić-Kaknjo, Mersiha
Tomić, Vicko
Ellen, Moriah E.
Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara
Sfetcu, Raluca
Baladia, Eduard
Riva, Nicoletta
Kassianos, Angelos P.
Marušić, Ana
author_facet Mahmić-Kaknjo, Mersiha
Tomić, Vicko
Ellen, Moriah E.
Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara
Sfetcu, Raluca
Baladia, Eduard
Riva, Nicoletta
Kassianos, Angelos P.
Marušić, Ana
author_sort Mahmić-Kaknjo, Mersiha
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews (SRs) are invaluable evidence syntheses, widely used in biomedicine and other scientific areas. Tremendous resources are being spent on the production and updating of SRs. There is a continuous need to automatize the process and use the workforce and resources to make it faster and more efficient. METHODS: Information gathered by previous EVBRES research was used to construct a questionnaire for round 1 which was partly quantitative, partly qualitative. Fifty five experienced SR authors were invited to participate in a Delphi study (DS) designed to identify the most promising areas and methods to improve the efficient production and updating of SRs. Topic questions focused on which areas of SRs are most time/effort/resource intensive and should be prioritized in further research. Data were analysed using NVivo 12 plus, Microsoft Excel 2013 and SPSS. Thematic analysis findings were used on the topics on which agreement was not reached in round 1 in order to prepare the questionnaire for round 2. RESULTS: Sixty percent (33/55) of the invited participants completed round 1; 44% (24/55) completed round 2. Participants reported average of 13.3 years of experience in conducting SRs (SD 6.8). More than two thirds of the respondents agreed/strongly agreed the following topics should be prioritized: extracting data, literature searching, screening abstracts, obtaining and screening full texts, updating SRs, finding previous SRs, translating non-English studies, synthesizing data, project management, writing the protocol, constructing the search strategy and critically appraising. Participants have not considered following areas as priority: snowballing, GRADE-ing, writing SR, deduplication, formulating SR question, performing meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Data extraction was prioritized by the majority of participants as an area that needs more research/methods development. Quality of available language translating tools has dramatically increased over the years (Google translate, DeepL). The promising new tool for snowballing emerged (Citation Chaser). Automation cannot substitute human judgement where complex decisions are needed (GRADE-ing). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study protocol was registered at https://osf.io/bp2hu/.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10042663
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100426632023-03-28 Delphi survey on the most promising areas and methods to improve systematic reviews’ production and updating Mahmić-Kaknjo, Mersiha Tomić, Vicko Ellen, Moriah E. Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara Sfetcu, Raluca Baladia, Eduard Riva, Nicoletta Kassianos, Angelos P. Marušić, Ana Syst Rev Research BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews (SRs) are invaluable evidence syntheses, widely used in biomedicine and other scientific areas. Tremendous resources are being spent on the production and updating of SRs. There is a continuous need to automatize the process and use the workforce and resources to make it faster and more efficient. METHODS: Information gathered by previous EVBRES research was used to construct a questionnaire for round 1 which was partly quantitative, partly qualitative. Fifty five experienced SR authors were invited to participate in a Delphi study (DS) designed to identify the most promising areas and methods to improve the efficient production and updating of SRs. Topic questions focused on which areas of SRs are most time/effort/resource intensive and should be prioritized in further research. Data were analysed using NVivo 12 plus, Microsoft Excel 2013 and SPSS. Thematic analysis findings were used on the topics on which agreement was not reached in round 1 in order to prepare the questionnaire for round 2. RESULTS: Sixty percent (33/55) of the invited participants completed round 1; 44% (24/55) completed round 2. Participants reported average of 13.3 years of experience in conducting SRs (SD 6.8). More than two thirds of the respondents agreed/strongly agreed the following topics should be prioritized: extracting data, literature searching, screening abstracts, obtaining and screening full texts, updating SRs, finding previous SRs, translating non-English studies, synthesizing data, project management, writing the protocol, constructing the search strategy and critically appraising. Participants have not considered following areas as priority: snowballing, GRADE-ing, writing SR, deduplication, formulating SR question, performing meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Data extraction was prioritized by the majority of participants as an area that needs more research/methods development. Quality of available language translating tools has dramatically increased over the years (Google translate, DeepL). The promising new tool for snowballing emerged (Citation Chaser). Automation cannot substitute human judgement where complex decisions are needed (GRADE-ing). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study protocol was registered at https://osf.io/bp2hu/. BioMed Central 2023-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10042663/ /pubmed/36973729 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02223-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Mahmić-Kaknjo, Mersiha
Tomić, Vicko
Ellen, Moriah E.
Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara
Sfetcu, Raluca
Baladia, Eduard
Riva, Nicoletta
Kassianos, Angelos P.
Marušić, Ana
Delphi survey on the most promising areas and methods to improve systematic reviews’ production and updating
title Delphi survey on the most promising areas and methods to improve systematic reviews’ production and updating
title_full Delphi survey on the most promising areas and methods to improve systematic reviews’ production and updating
title_fullStr Delphi survey on the most promising areas and methods to improve systematic reviews’ production and updating
title_full_unstemmed Delphi survey on the most promising areas and methods to improve systematic reviews’ production and updating
title_short Delphi survey on the most promising areas and methods to improve systematic reviews’ production and updating
title_sort delphi survey on the most promising areas and methods to improve systematic reviews’ production and updating
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10042663/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36973729
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02223-3
work_keys_str_mv AT mahmickaknjomersiha delphisurveyonthemostpromisingareasandmethodstoimprovesystematicreviewsproductionandupdating
AT tomicvicko delphisurveyonthemostpromisingareasandmethodstoimprovesystematicreviewsproductionandupdating
AT ellenmoriahe delphisurveyonthemostpromisingareasandmethodstoimprovesystematicreviewsproductionandupdating
AT nussbaumerstreitbarbara delphisurveyonthemostpromisingareasandmethodstoimprovesystematicreviewsproductionandupdating
AT sfetcuraluca delphisurveyonthemostpromisingareasandmethodstoimprovesystematicreviewsproductionandupdating
AT baladiaeduard delphisurveyonthemostpromisingareasandmethodstoimprovesystematicreviewsproductionandupdating
AT rivanicoletta delphisurveyonthemostpromisingareasandmethodstoimprovesystematicreviewsproductionandupdating
AT kassianosangelosp delphisurveyonthemostpromisingareasandmethodstoimprovesystematicreviewsproductionandupdating
AT marusicana delphisurveyonthemostpromisingareasandmethodstoimprovesystematicreviewsproductionandupdating