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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |