Cargando…
Data extraction and comparison for complex systematic reviews: a step-by-step guideline and an implementation example using open-source software
BACKGROUND: Data extraction (DE) is a challenging step in systematic reviews (SRs). Complex SRs can involve multiple interventions and/or outcomes and encompass multiple research questions. Attempts have been made to clarify DE aspects focusing on the subsequent meta-analysis; there are, however, no...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10691069/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38041161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02322-1 |
_version_ | 1785152662237347840 |
---|---|
author | Afifi, Mohamed Stryhn, Henrik Sanchez, Javier |
author_facet | Afifi, Mohamed Stryhn, Henrik Sanchez, Javier |
author_sort | Afifi, Mohamed |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Data extraction (DE) is a challenging step in systematic reviews (SRs). Complex SRs can involve multiple interventions and/or outcomes and encompass multiple research questions. Attempts have been made to clarify DE aspects focusing on the subsequent meta-analysis; there are, however, no guidelines for DE in complex SRs. Comparing datasets extracted independently by pairs of reviewers to detect discrepancies is also cumbersome, especially when the number of extracted variables and/or studies is colossal. This work aims to provide a set of practical steps to help SR teams design and build DE tools and compare extracted data for complex SRs. METHODS: We provided a 10-step guideline, from determining data items and structure to data comparison, to help identify discrepancies and solve data disagreements between reviewers. The steps were organised into three phases: planning and building the database and data manipulation. Each step was described and illustrated with examples, and relevant references were provided for further guidance. A demonstration example was presented to illustrate the application of Epi Info and R in the database building and data manipulation phases. The proposed guideline was also summarised and compared with previous DE guidelines. RESULTS: The steps of this guideline are described generally without focusing on a particular software application or meta-analysis technique. We emphasised determining the organisational data structure and highlighted its role in the subsequent steps of database building. In addition to the minimal programming skills needed, creating relational databases and data validation features of Epi info can be utilised to build DE tools for complex SRs. However, two R libraries are needed to facilitate data comparison and solve discrepancies. CONCLUSIONS: We hope adopting this guideline can help review teams construct DE tools that suit their complex review projects. Although Epi Info depends on proprietary software for data storage, it can still be a potential alternative to other commercial DE software for completing complex reviews. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-023-02322-1. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10691069 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106910692023-12-02 Data extraction and comparison for complex systematic reviews: a step-by-step guideline and an implementation example using open-source software Afifi, Mohamed Stryhn, Henrik Sanchez, Javier Syst Rev Research BACKGROUND: Data extraction (DE) is a challenging step in systematic reviews (SRs). Complex SRs can involve multiple interventions and/or outcomes and encompass multiple research questions. Attempts have been made to clarify DE aspects focusing on the subsequent meta-analysis; there are, however, no guidelines for DE in complex SRs. Comparing datasets extracted independently by pairs of reviewers to detect discrepancies is also cumbersome, especially when the number of extracted variables and/or studies is colossal. This work aims to provide a set of practical steps to help SR teams design and build DE tools and compare extracted data for complex SRs. METHODS: We provided a 10-step guideline, from determining data items and structure to data comparison, to help identify discrepancies and solve data disagreements between reviewers. The steps were organised into three phases: planning and building the database and data manipulation. Each step was described and illustrated with examples, and relevant references were provided for further guidance. A demonstration example was presented to illustrate the application of Epi Info and R in the database building and data manipulation phases. The proposed guideline was also summarised and compared with previous DE guidelines. RESULTS: The steps of this guideline are described generally without focusing on a particular software application or meta-analysis technique. We emphasised determining the organisational data structure and highlighted its role in the subsequent steps of database building. In addition to the minimal programming skills needed, creating relational databases and data validation features of Epi info can be utilised to build DE tools for complex SRs. However, two R libraries are needed to facilitate data comparison and solve discrepancies. CONCLUSIONS: We hope adopting this guideline can help review teams construct DE tools that suit their complex review projects. Although Epi Info depends on proprietary software for data storage, it can still be a potential alternative to other commercial DE software for completing complex reviews. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-023-02322-1. BioMed Central 2023-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10691069/ /pubmed/38041161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02322-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This 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 Afifi, Mohamed Stryhn, Henrik Sanchez, Javier Data extraction and comparison for complex systematic reviews: a step-by-step guideline and an implementation example using open-source software |
title | Data extraction and comparison for complex systematic reviews: a step-by-step guideline and an implementation example using open-source software |
title_full | Data extraction and comparison for complex systematic reviews: a step-by-step guideline and an implementation example using open-source software |
title_fullStr | Data extraction and comparison for complex systematic reviews: a step-by-step guideline and an implementation example using open-source software |
title_full_unstemmed | Data extraction and comparison for complex systematic reviews: a step-by-step guideline and an implementation example using open-source software |
title_short | Data extraction and comparison for complex systematic reviews: a step-by-step guideline and an implementation example using open-source software |
title_sort | data extraction and comparison for complex systematic reviews: a step-by-step guideline and an implementation example using open-source software |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10691069/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38041161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02322-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT afifimohamed dataextractionandcomparisonforcomplexsystematicreviewsastepbystepguidelineandanimplementationexampleusingopensourcesoftware AT stryhnhenrik dataextractionandcomparisonforcomplexsystematicreviewsastepbystepguidelineandanimplementationexampleusingopensourcesoftware AT sanchezjavier dataextractionandcomparisonforcomplexsystematicreviewsastepbystepguidelineandanimplementationexampleusingopensourcesoftware |