Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal aims to publish high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modeling. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
- David Moher, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
- Paul G Shekelle, RAND Corporation
- Lesley A Stewart, CRD, University of York
The effect of homeopathic treatment is highly debated. A global systematic review was conducted focusing on the individualized homeopathy treatment approach; the results suggested there may be a small, specific treatment effect, though the evidence quality prompts caution in interpreting these findings.
Prognostic risk factors are increasingly being assessed for a variety of health conditions. Using an example from cardiovascular disease, differences in methodological approaches for both primary studies and systematic reviews of prognostic studies may affect the findings and interpretation of the research.
Impact of missing participant data for dichotomous outcomes on pooled effect estimates in systematic reviews
Debate surrounds best practice when dealing with missing outcome data from trial participants. This study will assess how systematic reviews categorize and dealt with missing participant data, along with the impact of using different methods of dealing with missing participant data on pooled effect estimates in meta-analyses.
The use of systematic reviews to inform policymaking is strongly debated. The analysis of opinion articles either for or against the use of systematic reviews revealed those critical of the use of systematic reviews were over twice as likely to have industry ties than those that were supportive.
Efficacy of searching in biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE in identifying studies for a systematic review
Comprehensive search strategies during systematic reviews are vital. To assess the value of searching biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE, the authors conducted an audit of sources used in a systematic review on the efficacy of ward closure as an infection outbreak control intervention.
Latest from PROSPERO
- A literature review of tools or assessment scales used to assess risk factors for delirium in older adults undergoing CABG or hip surgeries
- A protocol for systematic review for barriers to obstetric care at health facilities in sub-Saharan Africa
- A Rapid Evidence synthesis of Outcomes and Care Utilisation following Self-care support for children and adolescents with long term conditions (REfOCUS): reducing care utilisation without comprising health outcomes
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the opioid receptor antagonist alvimopan for the patient with postoperative ileus following abdominal surgery
- A systematic review of interventions in older age for increasing the uptake and maintenance of healthy behaviours that may impact on successful ageing
Network meta-analyses call for papers
Systematic Reviews is encouraging the submission of methodological papers concerning the conduct and reporting of network meta-analyses, along with network meta-analysis results papers. Please see the call for papers information page for more details.
Dr. David Moher is a senior scientist at the Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, and Associate Professor, Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, University of Ottawa. Dr. Moher has been involved in systematic reviews for more than 20 years and has made contributions to the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. Dr. Moher is associated with many journals, is a member of the advisory board for the International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, and a member of the EQUATOR Network's steering group.
In addition to currently serving as a Staff Physician at the West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Dr. Shekelle has served as the Director of the Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center for the RAND Corporation since 1997. He is also a Professor of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) School of Medicine. He is widely recognized in the field of guidelines, quality measurement, and evidence-based medicine. Dr. Shekelle has extensive experience in the health care arena and was previously the methodologist for the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (now the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [AHRQ]) Low-Back Guidelines Panel, and he has participated in a number of other guideline development activities. He is currently the chair of the Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians.
Professor Lesley Stewart is Director of the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) at the University of York and is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Senior Investigator. Lesley has been involved in evidence synthesis in healthcare since the late 1980's, previously running the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit meta-analysis research programme. Together with colleagues in Cambridge and Oxford, she helped establish the methodology and framework for individual patient data (IPD) reviews and was a founding member of the Cochrane Collaboration. Her research interests include the avoidance of bias and development of IPD methods and approaches to systematic review. Recently, she has instigated the development of PROSPERO an international register for the prospective registration of systematic reviews.