Cargando…

Development of a checklist to detect errors in meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol

Background : Systematic reviews underpin clinical practice and policies that guide healthcare decisions. A core component of many systematic reviews is meta-analysis, which is a statistical synthesis of results across studies. Errors in the conduct and interpretation of meta-analysis can lead to inc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kanukula, Raju, Page, Matthew, Dwan, Kerry, Turner, Simon, Loder, Elizabeth, Mayo-Wilson, Evan, Li, Tianjing, Misra, Adya, McDonald, Steve, Forbes, Andrew, McKenzie, Joanne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000 Research Limited 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8258702/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34249342
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.53034.1
_version_ 1783718547056230400
author Kanukula, Raju
Page, Matthew
Dwan, Kerry
Turner, Simon
Loder, Elizabeth
Mayo-Wilson, Evan
Li, Tianjing
Misra, Adya
McDonald, Steve
Forbes, Andrew
McKenzie, Joanne
author_facet Kanukula, Raju
Page, Matthew
Dwan, Kerry
Turner, Simon
Loder, Elizabeth
Mayo-Wilson, Evan
Li, Tianjing
Misra, Adya
McDonald, Steve
Forbes, Andrew
McKenzie, Joanne
author_sort Kanukula, Raju
collection PubMed
description Background : Systematic reviews underpin clinical practice and policies that guide healthcare decisions. A core component of many systematic reviews is meta-analysis, which is a statistical synthesis of results across studies. Errors in the conduct and interpretation of meta-analysis can lead to incorrect conclusions regarding the benefits and harms of interventions; and studies have shown that these errors are common. Enabling peer reviewers to better detect errors in meta-analysis through the use of a checklist provides an opportunity for these errors to be rectified before publication. To our knowledge, no such checklist exists. Objective : To develop and evaluate a checklist to detect errors in pairwise meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions. Methods : We will undertake a four-step process to develop the checklist. First, we will undertake a systematic review of studies that have evaluated errors in the conduct and interpretation of meta-analysis to generate a bank of items to consider for the checklist. Second, we will undertake a survey of systematic review methodologists and statisticians to seek their views on which items, of the bank of items generated in step 1, are most important to include in the checklist. Third, we will hold a virtual meeting to agree upon which items to include in the checklist. Fourth, before finalising the checklist, we will pilot with editors and peer reviewers of journals. Conclusion : The developed checklist is intended to help journal editors and peer reviewers identify errors in the application and interpretation of meta-analyses in systematic reviews. Fewer errors in the conduct and improved interpretation will lead to more accurate review findings and conclusions to inform clinical practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8258702
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher F1000 Research Limited
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82587022021-07-09 Development of a checklist to detect errors in meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol Kanukula, Raju Page, Matthew Dwan, Kerry Turner, Simon Loder, Elizabeth Mayo-Wilson, Evan Li, Tianjing Misra, Adya McDonald, Steve Forbes, Andrew McKenzie, Joanne F1000Res Study Protocol Background : Systematic reviews underpin clinical practice and policies that guide healthcare decisions. A core component of many systematic reviews is meta-analysis, which is a statistical synthesis of results across studies. Errors in the conduct and interpretation of meta-analysis can lead to incorrect conclusions regarding the benefits and harms of interventions; and studies have shown that these errors are common. Enabling peer reviewers to better detect errors in meta-analysis through the use of a checklist provides an opportunity for these errors to be rectified before publication. To our knowledge, no such checklist exists. Objective : To develop and evaluate a checklist to detect errors in pairwise meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions. Methods : We will undertake a four-step process to develop the checklist. First, we will undertake a systematic review of studies that have evaluated errors in the conduct and interpretation of meta-analysis to generate a bank of items to consider for the checklist. Second, we will undertake a survey of systematic review methodologists and statisticians to seek their views on which items, of the bank of items generated in step 1, are most important to include in the checklist. Third, we will hold a virtual meeting to agree upon which items to include in the checklist. Fourth, before finalising the checklist, we will pilot with editors and peer reviewers of journals. Conclusion : The developed checklist is intended to help journal editors and peer reviewers identify errors in the application and interpretation of meta-analyses in systematic reviews. Fewer errors in the conduct and improved interpretation will lead to more accurate review findings and conclusions to inform clinical practice. F1000 Research Limited 2021-06-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8258702/ /pubmed/34249342 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.53034.1 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Kanukula R et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Kanukula, Raju
Page, Matthew
Dwan, Kerry
Turner, Simon
Loder, Elizabeth
Mayo-Wilson, Evan
Li, Tianjing
Misra, Adya
McDonald, Steve
Forbes, Andrew
McKenzie, Joanne
Development of a checklist to detect errors in meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol
title Development of a checklist to detect errors in meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol
title_full Development of a checklist to detect errors in meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol
title_fullStr Development of a checklist to detect errors in meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol
title_full_unstemmed Development of a checklist to detect errors in meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol
title_short Development of a checklist to detect errors in meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol
title_sort development of a checklist to detect errors in meta-analyses in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8258702/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34249342
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.53034.1
work_keys_str_mv AT kanukularaju developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol
AT pagematthew developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol
AT dwankerry developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol
AT turnersimon developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol
AT loderelizabeth developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol
AT mayowilsonevan developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol
AT litianjing developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol
AT misraadya developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol
AT mcdonaldsteve developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol
AT forbesandrew developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol
AT mckenziejoanne developmentofachecklisttodetecterrorsinmetaanalysesinsystematicreviewsofinterventionsstudyprotocol