Cargando…

Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews should specify all outcomes at the protocol stage. Pre-specification helps prevent outcome choice from being influenced by knowledge of included study results. Completely specified outcomes comprise five elements: (1) domain (title), (2) specific measurement (technique...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Durão, Solange, Visser, Marianne, Kredo, Tamara, Saldanha, Ian J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6953151/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31918757
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1268-1
_version_ 1783486585669419008
author Durão, Solange
Visser, Marianne
Kredo, Tamara
Saldanha, Ian J.
author_facet Durão, Solange
Visser, Marianne
Kredo, Tamara
Saldanha, Ian J.
author_sort Durão, Solange
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews should specify all outcomes at the protocol stage. Pre-specification helps prevent outcome choice from being influenced by knowledge of included study results. Completely specified outcomes comprise five elements: (1) domain (title), (2) specific measurement (technique/instrument), (3) specific metric (data format for analysis), (4) method of aggregation (how group data are summarised), and (5) time points. This study aims to assess the completeness of outcome pre-specification in systematic reviews of interventions to improve food security, specifically food availability, in low- and middle-income countries, as well as to assess the comparability of outcome elements across reviews reporting the same outcome domains. METHODS: We will examine systematic reviews from an ongoing overview of systematic reviews, which assessed the effects of interventions addressing food insecurity through improving food production, access, or utilisation compared with no intervention or a different intervention, on nutrition outcomes. We will examine the original protocols; if unavailable, we will examine the “Methods” section of the systematic reviews’ most recent version. One investigator will identify and group all outcome domains that the authors of the included protocols intended to measure in the systematic review and a second investigator will verify the domains. For outcome domains reported in at least 25% of protocols, one author will extract data using a pre-specified form and a second author will verify the data. We will use descriptive statistics to report the number, types, and degree of specification of outcomes in included protocols. We will assess the extent of completeness of outcome pre-specification based on the number of outcome elements (out of five). We will assess comparability of outcome domains through examining how individual elements are described across SRs reporting the same outcome domains. DISCUSSION: Our findings will contribute to understanding about the best approach to pre-specify outcomes for systematic reviews and primary research in the field of food security.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6953151
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69531512020-01-14 Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study Durão, Solange Visser, Marianne Kredo, Tamara Saldanha, Ian J. Syst Rev Protocol BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews should specify all outcomes at the protocol stage. Pre-specification helps prevent outcome choice from being influenced by knowledge of included study results. Completely specified outcomes comprise five elements: (1) domain (title), (2) specific measurement (technique/instrument), (3) specific metric (data format for analysis), (4) method of aggregation (how group data are summarised), and (5) time points. This study aims to assess the completeness of outcome pre-specification in systematic reviews of interventions to improve food security, specifically food availability, in low- and middle-income countries, as well as to assess the comparability of outcome elements across reviews reporting the same outcome domains. METHODS: We will examine systematic reviews from an ongoing overview of systematic reviews, which assessed the effects of interventions addressing food insecurity through improving food production, access, or utilisation compared with no intervention or a different intervention, on nutrition outcomes. We will examine the original protocols; if unavailable, we will examine the “Methods” section of the systematic reviews’ most recent version. One investigator will identify and group all outcome domains that the authors of the included protocols intended to measure in the systematic review and a second investigator will verify the domains. For outcome domains reported in at least 25% of protocols, one author will extract data using a pre-specified form and a second author will verify the data. We will use descriptive statistics to report the number, types, and degree of specification of outcomes in included protocols. We will assess the extent of completeness of outcome pre-specification based on the number of outcome elements (out of five). We will assess comparability of outcome domains through examining how individual elements are described across SRs reporting the same outcome domains. DISCUSSION: Our findings will contribute to understanding about the best approach to pre-specify outcomes for systematic reviews and primary research in the field of food security. BioMed Central 2020-01-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6953151/ /pubmed/31918757 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1268-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Protocol
Durão, Solange
Visser, Marianne
Kredo, Tamara
Saldanha, Ian J.
Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study
title Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study
title_full Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study
title_fullStr Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study
title_short Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study
title_sort assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study
topic Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6953151/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31918757
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1268-1
work_keys_str_mv AT duraosolange assessingthecompletenessandcomparabilityofoutcomesinsystematicreviewsaddressingfoodsecurityprotocolforamethodologicalstudy
AT vissermarianne assessingthecompletenessandcomparabilityofoutcomesinsystematicreviewsaddressingfoodsecurityprotocolforamethodologicalstudy
AT kredotamara assessingthecompletenessandcomparabilityofoutcomesinsystematicreviewsaddressingfoodsecurityprotocolforamethodologicalstudy
AT saldanhaianj assessingthecompletenessandcomparabilityofoutcomesinsystematicreviewsaddressingfoodsecurityprotocolforamethodologicalstudy