Cargando…

Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part I: why and for whom?

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Healthcare decision-making is complex and should involve healthcare professionals, patients and the best level of evidence. The speed of information production creates barriers against keeping up to date. In this light, methodologists have proposed a new type of study: overvie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Silva, Valter, Grande, Antonio José, Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera, Riera, Rachel, Carvalho, Alan Pedrosa Viegas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10522321/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23338737
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-31802012000600007
_version_ 1785110333887610880
author Silva, Valter
Grande, Antonio José
Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera
Riera, Rachel
Carvalho, Alan Pedrosa Viegas
author_facet Silva, Valter
Grande, Antonio José
Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera
Riera, Rachel
Carvalho, Alan Pedrosa Viegas
author_sort Silva, Valter
collection PubMed
description CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Healthcare decision-making is complex and should involve healthcare professionals, patients and the best level of evidence. The speed of information production creates barriers against keeping up to date. In this light, methodologists have proposed a new type of study: overviews of systematic reviews (OoRs). The aim here was to introduce and demonstrate the role of OoRs in information synthesis for healthcare professionals, managers, researchers and patients. DESIGN AND SETTING: Time-series study conducted at the Brazilian Cochrane Center, jointly with the Postgraduate Program on Internal Medicine and Therapeutics, Discipline of Emergency Medicine and Evidence-Based Medicine, Department of Medicine, Federal University of São Paulo. METHODS: To show the growth in the numbers of published papers that provide high-level evidence and thus demonstrate the importance of OoRs for synthesis and integration of information, three filters for study designs were applied to two databases. An equation for predicting the expected number of published papers was developed and applied. RESULTS: Over the present decade, the number of randomized controlled trials in Medline might reach 2,863,203 and the number of systematic reviews might reach 174,262. Nine OoRs and 15 OoRs protocols have been published in the Cochrane Library. CONCLUSIONS: With the exponential growth of published papers, as shown in this study, a new type of study directed especially towards healthcare decision-makers was proposed, named “overview of systematic reviews”. This could reduce the uncertainties in decision-making and generate a new hierarchy in the pyramid of evidence.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10522321
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105223212023-09-27 Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part I: why and for whom? Silva, Valter Grande, Antonio José Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera Riera, Rachel Carvalho, Alan Pedrosa Viegas Sao Paulo Med J Original Article CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Healthcare decision-making is complex and should involve healthcare professionals, patients and the best level of evidence. The speed of information production creates barriers against keeping up to date. In this light, methodologists have proposed a new type of study: overviews of systematic reviews (OoRs). The aim here was to introduce and demonstrate the role of OoRs in information synthesis for healthcare professionals, managers, researchers and patients. DESIGN AND SETTING: Time-series study conducted at the Brazilian Cochrane Center, jointly with the Postgraduate Program on Internal Medicine and Therapeutics, Discipline of Emergency Medicine and Evidence-Based Medicine, Department of Medicine, Federal University of São Paulo. METHODS: To show the growth in the numbers of published papers that provide high-level evidence and thus demonstrate the importance of OoRs for synthesis and integration of information, three filters for study designs were applied to two databases. An equation for predicting the expected number of published papers was developed and applied. RESULTS: Over the present decade, the number of randomized controlled trials in Medline might reach 2,863,203 and the number of systematic reviews might reach 174,262. Nine OoRs and 15 OoRs protocols have been published in the Cochrane Library. CONCLUSIONS: With the exponential growth of published papers, as shown in this study, a new type of study directed especially towards healthcare decision-makers was proposed, named “overview of systematic reviews”. This could reduce the uncertainties in decision-making and generate a new hierarchy in the pyramid of evidence. Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM 2013-01-18 /pmc/articles/PMC10522321/ /pubmed/23338737 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-31802012000600007 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons license.
spellingShingle Original Article
Silva, Valter
Grande, Antonio José
Martimbianco, Ana Luiza Cabrera
Riera, Rachel
Carvalho, Alan Pedrosa Viegas
Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part I: why and for whom?
title Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part I: why and for whom?
title_full Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part I: why and for whom?
title_fullStr Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part I: why and for whom?
title_full_unstemmed Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part I: why and for whom?
title_short Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part I: why and for whom?
title_sort overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. part i: why and for whom?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10522321/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23338737
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1516-31802012000600007
work_keys_str_mv AT silvavalter overviewofsystematicreviewsanewtypeofstudypartiwhyandforwhom
AT grandeantoniojose overviewofsystematicreviewsanewtypeofstudypartiwhyandforwhom
AT martimbiancoanaluizacabrera overviewofsystematicreviewsanewtypeofstudypartiwhyandforwhom
AT rierarachel overviewofsystematicreviewsanewtypeofstudypartiwhyandforwhom
AT carvalhoalanpedrosaviegas overviewofsystematicreviewsanewtypeofstudypartiwhyandforwhom