Cargando…
Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19
PURPOSE: The systematic review aims to analyze and summarize the characteristics of living systematic review (LSR) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: Six databases including Medline, Excerpta Medica (Embase), Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Da...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9359410/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35958161 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S367339 |
_version_ | 1784764134866288640 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Zhe Luo, Jiefeng Li, Siyu Xu, Peipei Zeng, Linan Yu, Qin Zhang, Lingli |
author_facet | Chen, Zhe Luo, Jiefeng Li, Siyu Xu, Peipei Zeng, Linan Yu, Qin Zhang, Lingli |
author_sort | Chen, Zhe |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: The systematic review aims to analyze and summarize the characteristics of living systematic review (LSR) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: Six databases including Medline, Excerpta Medica (Embase), Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database and China Science, and Technology Journal Database (VIP), were searched as the source of basic information and methodology of LSR. Descriptive analytical methods were used to analyze the included COVID-19 LSRs, and the study characteristics of COVID-19 LSRs were further assessed. RESULTS: Sixty-four COVID-19 LSRs were included. Eighty-nine point one percent of LSRs were published on Science Citation Index (SCI) journals, and 64.1% publication with an impact factor (IF) >5 and 17.2% with an IF >15 among SCI journals. The first unit of the published LSRs for COVID-19 came from 19 countries, with the largest contribution from the UK (17.2%, 11/64). Forty point six percent of LSRs for COVID-19 were related to therapeutics topic which was considered the most concerned perspective for LSRs for COVID-19. Seventy-six point six percent of LSRs focused on the general population, with less attention to children, pregnant women and the elderly. However, the LSR for COVID-19 was reported incomplete on “living” process, including 40.6% of studies without search frequency, 79.7% of studies without screening frequency, 20.3% of studies without update frequency, and 65.6% of studies without the timing or criteria of transitioning LSR out of living mode. CONCLUSION: Although researchers in many countries have applied LSRs to COVID-19, most of the LSRs for COVID-19 were incomplete in reporting on the “living” process and less focused on special populations. This could reduce the confidence of health-care providers and policy makers in the results of COVID-19 LSR, thereby hindering the translation of evidence on COVID-19 LSR into clinical practice. It was necessary to explicitly enact preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) to improve the reporting quality of LSR and support ongoing efforts of therapeutics research for special patients with COVID-19. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9359410 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Dove |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93594102022-08-10 Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19 Chen, Zhe Luo, Jiefeng Li, Siyu Xu, Peipei Zeng, Linan Yu, Qin Zhang, Lingli Clin Epidemiol Original Research PURPOSE: The systematic review aims to analyze and summarize the characteristics of living systematic review (LSR) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: Six databases including Medline, Excerpta Medica (Embase), Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database and China Science, and Technology Journal Database (VIP), were searched as the source of basic information and methodology of LSR. Descriptive analytical methods were used to analyze the included COVID-19 LSRs, and the study characteristics of COVID-19 LSRs were further assessed. RESULTS: Sixty-four COVID-19 LSRs were included. Eighty-nine point one percent of LSRs were published on Science Citation Index (SCI) journals, and 64.1% publication with an impact factor (IF) >5 and 17.2% with an IF >15 among SCI journals. The first unit of the published LSRs for COVID-19 came from 19 countries, with the largest contribution from the UK (17.2%, 11/64). Forty point six percent of LSRs for COVID-19 were related to therapeutics topic which was considered the most concerned perspective for LSRs for COVID-19. Seventy-six point six percent of LSRs focused on the general population, with less attention to children, pregnant women and the elderly. However, the LSR for COVID-19 was reported incomplete on “living” process, including 40.6% of studies without search frequency, 79.7% of studies without screening frequency, 20.3% of studies without update frequency, and 65.6% of studies without the timing or criteria of transitioning LSR out of living mode. CONCLUSION: Although researchers in many countries have applied LSRs to COVID-19, most of the LSRs for COVID-19 were incomplete in reporting on the “living” process and less focused on special populations. This could reduce the confidence of health-care providers and policy makers in the results of COVID-19 LSR, thereby hindering the translation of evidence on COVID-19 LSR into clinical practice. It was necessary to explicitly enact preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) to improve the reporting quality of LSR and support ongoing efforts of therapeutics research for special patients with COVID-19. Dove 2022-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9359410/ /pubmed/35958161 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S367339 Text en © 2022 Chen et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Chen, Zhe Luo, Jiefeng Li, Siyu Xu, Peipei Zeng, Linan Yu, Qin Zhang, Lingli Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19 |
title | Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19 |
title_full | Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19 |
title_fullStr | Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19 |
title_full_unstemmed | Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19 |
title_short | Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19 |
title_sort | characteristics of living systematic review for covid-19 |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9359410/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35958161 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S367339 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenzhe characteristicsoflivingsystematicreviewforcovid19 AT luojiefeng characteristicsoflivingsystematicreviewforcovid19 AT lisiyu characteristicsoflivingsystematicreviewforcovid19 AT xupeipei characteristicsoflivingsystematicreviewforcovid19 AT zenglinan characteristicsoflivingsystematicreviewforcovid19 AT yuqin characteristicsoflivingsystematicreviewforcovid19 AT zhanglingli characteristicsoflivingsystematicreviewforcovid19 |