Cargando…

Impact and use of reviews and ‘overviews of reviews’ to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations: protocol for a methods study

INTRODUCTION: Guidelines are systematically developed recommendations to assist practitioner and patient decisions about treatments for clinical conditions. High quality and comprehensive systematic reviews and ‘overviews of systematic reviews’ (overviews) represent the best available evidence. Many...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lunny, Carole, Ramasubbu, Cynthia, Gerrish, Savannah, Liu, Tracy, Salzwedel, Douglas M, Puil, Lorri, Mintzes, Barbara, Wright, James (Jim)
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7044835/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31964662
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031442
_version_ 1783501650189615104
author Lunny, Carole
Ramasubbu, Cynthia
Gerrish, Savannah
Liu, Tracy
Salzwedel, Douglas M
Puil, Lorri
Mintzes, Barbara
Wright, James (Jim)
author_facet Lunny, Carole
Ramasubbu, Cynthia
Gerrish, Savannah
Liu, Tracy
Salzwedel, Douglas M
Puil, Lorri
Mintzes, Barbara
Wright, James (Jim)
author_sort Lunny, Carole
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Guidelines are systematically developed recommendations to assist practitioner and patient decisions about treatments for clinical conditions. High quality and comprehensive systematic reviews and ‘overviews of systematic reviews’ (overviews) represent the best available evidence. Many guideline developers, such as the WHO and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, recommend the use of these research syntheses to underpin guideline recommendations. We aim to evaluate the impact and use of systematic reviews with and without pairwise meta-analysis or network meta-analyses (NMAs) and overviews in clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: CPGs will be retrieved from Turning Research Into Practice and Epistemonikos (2017–2018). The retrieved citations will be sorted randomly and then screened sequentially by two independent reviewers until 50 CPGs have been identified. We will include CPGs that provide at least two explicit recommendations for the management of any clinical condition. We will assess whether reviews or overviews were cited in a recommendation as part of the development process for guidelines. Data extraction will be done independently by two authors and compared. We will assess the risk of bias by examining how each guideline developed clinical recommendations. We will calculate the number and frequency of citations of reviews with or without pairwise meta-analysis, reviews with NMAs and overviews, and whether they were systematically or non-systematically developed. Results will be described, tabulated and categorised based on review type (reviews or overviews). CPGs reporting the use of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be compared with those using a different system, and pharmacological versus non-pharmacological CPGs will be compared. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is required. We will present at the Cochrane Colloquium and the Guidelines International Network conference.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7044835
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70448352020-03-09 Impact and use of reviews and ‘overviews of reviews’ to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations: protocol for a methods study Lunny, Carole Ramasubbu, Cynthia Gerrish, Savannah Liu, Tracy Salzwedel, Douglas M Puil, Lorri Mintzes, Barbara Wright, James (Jim) BMJ Open Evidence Based Practice INTRODUCTION: Guidelines are systematically developed recommendations to assist practitioner and patient decisions about treatments for clinical conditions. High quality and comprehensive systematic reviews and ‘overviews of systematic reviews’ (overviews) represent the best available evidence. Many guideline developers, such as the WHO and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, recommend the use of these research syntheses to underpin guideline recommendations. We aim to evaluate the impact and use of systematic reviews with and without pairwise meta-analysis or network meta-analyses (NMAs) and overviews in clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: CPGs will be retrieved from Turning Research Into Practice and Epistemonikos (2017–2018). The retrieved citations will be sorted randomly and then screened sequentially by two independent reviewers until 50 CPGs have been identified. We will include CPGs that provide at least two explicit recommendations for the management of any clinical condition. We will assess whether reviews or overviews were cited in a recommendation as part of the development process for guidelines. Data extraction will be done independently by two authors and compared. We will assess the risk of bias by examining how each guideline developed clinical recommendations. We will calculate the number and frequency of citations of reviews with or without pairwise meta-analysis, reviews with NMAs and overviews, and whether they were systematically or non-systematically developed. Results will be described, tabulated and categorised based on review type (reviews or overviews). CPGs reporting the use of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be compared with those using a different system, and pharmacological versus non-pharmacological CPGs will be compared. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is required. We will present at the Cochrane Colloquium and the Guidelines International Network conference. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7044835/ /pubmed/31964662 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031442 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Evidence Based Practice
Lunny, Carole
Ramasubbu, Cynthia
Gerrish, Savannah
Liu, Tracy
Salzwedel, Douglas M
Puil, Lorri
Mintzes, Barbara
Wright, James (Jim)
Impact and use of reviews and ‘overviews of reviews’ to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations: protocol for a methods study
title Impact and use of reviews and ‘overviews of reviews’ to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations: protocol for a methods study
title_full Impact and use of reviews and ‘overviews of reviews’ to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations: protocol for a methods study
title_fullStr Impact and use of reviews and ‘overviews of reviews’ to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations: protocol for a methods study
title_full_unstemmed Impact and use of reviews and ‘overviews of reviews’ to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations: protocol for a methods study
title_short Impact and use of reviews and ‘overviews of reviews’ to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations: protocol for a methods study
title_sort impact and use of reviews and ‘overviews of reviews’ to inform clinical practice guideline recommendations: protocol for a methods study
topic Evidence Based Practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7044835/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31964662
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031442
work_keys_str_mv AT lunnycarole impactanduseofreviewsandoverviewsofreviewstoinformclinicalpracticeguidelinerecommendationsprotocolforamethodsstudy
AT ramasubbucynthia impactanduseofreviewsandoverviewsofreviewstoinformclinicalpracticeguidelinerecommendationsprotocolforamethodsstudy
AT gerrishsavannah impactanduseofreviewsandoverviewsofreviewstoinformclinicalpracticeguidelinerecommendationsprotocolforamethodsstudy
AT liutracy impactanduseofreviewsandoverviewsofreviewstoinformclinicalpracticeguidelinerecommendationsprotocolforamethodsstudy
AT salzwedeldouglasm impactanduseofreviewsandoverviewsofreviewstoinformclinicalpracticeguidelinerecommendationsprotocolforamethodsstudy
AT puillorri impactanduseofreviewsandoverviewsofreviewstoinformclinicalpracticeguidelinerecommendationsprotocolforamethodsstudy
AT mintzesbarbara impactanduseofreviewsandoverviewsofreviewstoinformclinicalpracticeguidelinerecommendationsprotocolforamethodsstudy
AT wrightjamesjim impactanduseofreviewsandoverviewsofreviewstoinformclinicalpracticeguidelinerecommendationsprotocolforamethodsstudy