Cargando…

Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION: Sometimes, observational studies may provide important evidence that allow inferences of causality between exposure and outcome (although on most occasions only low certainty evidence). Authors, frequently and perhaps usually at the behest of the journals to which they are submitting,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Han, Mi Ah, Guyatt, Gordon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7389485/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32723747
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038571
_version_ 1783564409249988608
author Han, Mi Ah
Guyatt, Gordon
author_facet Han, Mi Ah
Guyatt, Gordon
author_sort Han, Mi Ah
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Sometimes, observational studies may provide important evidence that allow inferences of causality between exposure and outcome (although on most occasions only low certainty evidence). Authors, frequently and perhaps usually at the behest of the journals to which they are submitting, avoid using causal language when addressing evidence from observational studies. This is true even when the issue of interest is the causal effect of an intervention or exposure. Clarity of thinking and appropriateness of inferences may be enhanced through the use of language that reflects the issue under consideration. The objectives of this study are to systematically evaluate the extent and nature of causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies and to relate that to the actual intent of the investigation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic survey of systematic reviews of observational studies addressing modifiable exposures and their possible impact on patient-important outcomes. We will randomly select 200 reviews published in 2019, stratified in a 1:1 ratio by use and non-use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Teams of two reviewers will independently assess study eligibility and extract data using a standardised data extraction forms, with resolution of disagreement by discussion and, if necessary, by third party adjudication. Through examining the inferences, they make in their papers’ discussion, we will evaluate whether the authors’ intent was to address causation or association. We will summarise the use of causal language in the study title, abstract, study question and results using descriptive statistics. Finally, we will assess whether the language used is consistent with the intention of the authors. We will determine whether results in reviews that did or did not use GRADE differ. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval for this study is not required. We will disseminate the results through publication in a peer-reviewed journals. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (osf.io/vh8yx).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7389485
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73894852020-08-11 Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol Han, Mi Ah Guyatt, Gordon BMJ Open Evidence Based Practice INTRODUCTION: Sometimes, observational studies may provide important evidence that allow inferences of causality between exposure and outcome (although on most occasions only low certainty evidence). Authors, frequently and perhaps usually at the behest of the journals to which they are submitting, avoid using causal language when addressing evidence from observational studies. This is true even when the issue of interest is the causal effect of an intervention or exposure. Clarity of thinking and appropriateness of inferences may be enhanced through the use of language that reflects the issue under consideration. The objectives of this study are to systematically evaluate the extent and nature of causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies and to relate that to the actual intent of the investigation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic survey of systematic reviews of observational studies addressing modifiable exposures and their possible impact on patient-important outcomes. We will randomly select 200 reviews published in 2019, stratified in a 1:1 ratio by use and non-use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Teams of two reviewers will independently assess study eligibility and extract data using a standardised data extraction forms, with resolution of disagreement by discussion and, if necessary, by third party adjudication. Through examining the inferences, they make in their papers’ discussion, we will evaluate whether the authors’ intent was to address causation or association. We will summarise the use of causal language in the study title, abstract, study question and results using descriptive statistics. Finally, we will assess whether the language used is consistent with the intention of the authors. We will determine whether results in reviews that did or did not use GRADE differ. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval for this study is not required. We will disseminate the results through publication in a peer-reviewed journals. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (osf.io/vh8yx). BMJ Publishing Group 2020-07-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7389485/ /pubmed/32723747 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038571 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
Han, Mi Ah
Guyatt, Gordon
Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title_full Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title_fullStr Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title_full_unstemmed Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title_short Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title_sort systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
topic Evidence Based Practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7389485/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32723747
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038571
work_keys_str_mv AT hanmiah systematicsurveyofthecausallanguageuseinsystematicreviewsofobservationalstudiesastudyprotocol
AT guyattgordon systematicsurveyofthecausallanguageuseinsystematicreviewsofobservationalstudiesastudyprotocol