Analysis of the reporting of search strategies in Cochrane systematic reviews

Autogenous, alloplastic, or hybrid for total mandibular reconstruction; is here an optimal path?

For less fit patients, total reconstruction of the mandible (TRM) is an elucidated alternative for severe maxillofacial defects. This study aimed to comprehensively review and analyze the existing evidence, irrespective of the underlying pathologies, to provide a consolidated overview of the current state of TRM. An electronic search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar to identify studies reporting TRM without restrictions on patient age, type of pathology underlying the mandibular defect, and study type. Electronic search identified 390 studies; only 21 met the inclusion criteria, documenting 7 (33.3%) autogenous, 6 (28.6%) alloplastic, and 8 (38.1%) hybrid TRMs. All studies reported one clinical case, except for two studies that reported two patients treated with TRM. The mean age of the patients was 39.0 ± 19.4 years, and the mean follow-up was 22.3 ± 14.7 months. Osteomyelitis was the most common pathology. Bilateral condyles were preserved in only two cases. The TRM has been reported in clinical cases only and no large cohort study is available. Functional and aesthetic parameters have either not been reported or have been reported in heterogeneous formats, thus hampering comparisons of autogenous, alloplastic, and hybrid TRMs. Overall, TRM in patients presenting with severe maxillofacial defects achieved promising clinical outcomes endowed with acceptable function and aesthetics. Large cohort studies are needed to validate these results.

Systematic review search strategies are poorly reported and not reproducible: a cross-sectional metaresearch study

OBJECTIVES

To determine the reproducibility of biomedical systematic review search strategies.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A cross-sectional reproducibility study was conducted on a random sample of 100 systematic reviews indexed in MEDLINE in November 2021. The primary outcome measure is the percentage of systematic reviews for which all database searches can be reproduced, operationalized as fulfilling six key Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses literature search extension (PRISMA-S) reporting guideline items and having all database searches reproduced within 10% of the number of original results. Key reporting guideline items included database name, multi-database searching, full search strategies, limits and restrictions, date(s) of searches, and total records.

RESULTS

The 100 systematic review articles contained 453 database searches. Only 22 (4.9%) database searches reported all six PRISMA-S items. Forty-seven (10.4%) database searches could be reproduced within 10% of the number of results from the original search; six searches differed by more than 1,000% between the originally reported number of results and the reproduction. Only one systematic review article provided the necessary search details to be fully reproducible.

CONCLUSION

Systematic review search reporting is poor. To correct this will require a multifaceted response from authors, peer reviewers, journal editors, and database providers.

Open reproducible scientometric research with Alexandria3k

Considerable scientific work involves locating, analyzing, systematizing, and synthesizing other publications, often with the help of online scientific publication databases and search engines. However, use of online sources suffers from a lack of repeatability and transparency, as well as from technical restrictions. Alexandria3k is a Python software package and an associated command-line tool that can populate embedded relational databases with slices from the complete set of several open publication metadata sets. These can then be employed for reproducible processing and analysis through versatile and performant queries. We demonstrate the software's utility by visualizing the evolution of publications in diverse scientific fields and relationships among them, by outlining scientometric facts associated with COVID-19 research, and by replicating commonly-used bibliometric measures and findings regarding scientific productivity, impact, and disruption.

Effectiveness and safety of virtual reality rehabilitation after stroke: an overview of systematic reviews

Background

Virtual reality (VR) is an innovative neurorehabilitation modality that has been variously examined in systematic reviews. We assessed VR effectiveness and safety after cerebral stroke.

Methods

In this overview of systematic reviews, we searched eleven databases (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, ISI Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Pedro, Otseeker, Healthevidence.org, Epistemonikos) and grey literature from inception to January 17, 2023. Studies eligible for inclusion were systematic reviews published in English that included adult patients with a clinical diagnosis of stroke (acute to chronic phase) undergoing any kind of immersive, semi-immersive or non-immersive VR intervention with or without conventional therapy versus conventional therapy alone. The primary outcome was motor upper limb function and activity. The secondary outcomes were gait and balance, cognitive and mental function, limitation of activities, participation, and adverse events. We calculated the degree of overlap between reviews based on the corrected covered area (CCA). Methodological quality was assessed using the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2) and the Certainty of Evidence (CoE) using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Discordances between results were examined using a conceptual framework based on the Jadad algorithm. This overview is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022329263.

Findings

Of the 58 reviews included (n = 345 unique primary studies), 42 (72.4%) had conducted meta-analysis. More than half of the reviews (58.6%) were published between 2020 and 2022 and many (77.6%) were judged critically low in quality by AMSTAR 2. Most reported the Fugl Meyer Assessment scale (FMA-UE) to measure upper limb function and activity. For the primary outcome, there was a moderate overlap of primary studies (CCA 9.0%) with discordant findings. Focusing on upper limb function (FMA-UE), VR with or without conventional therapy seems to be more effective than conventional therapy alone, with low to moderate CoE and probable to definite clinical relevance. For secondary outcomes there was uncertainty about the superiority or no difference between groups due to substantial heterogeneity of measurement scales (eg, methodological choices). A few reviews (n = 6) reported the occurrence of mild adverse events.

Interpretation

Current evidence suggests that multiple meta-analyses agreed on the superiority of VR with or without conventional therapy over conventional therapy on FME-UE for upper limb. Clinicians may consider embedding VR technologies into their practice as appropriate with patient's goals, abilities, and preferences. However, caution is needed given the poor methodological quality of reviews.

Funding

Italian Ministry of Health.

Safety and efficacy of indocyanine green near-infrared fluorescent imaging-guided lymph node dissection during robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In Asia, particularly, robotic gastrectomy has grown in popularity as a treatment for stomach cancer. Indocyanine green (ICG) and near-infrared (NIR) fluorescent imaging technology has been reported for robotic gastrectomy. However, the clinical value still should be further evaluated. In this meta-analysis, we investigated the safety and efficacy of ICG near-infrared fluorescent imaging-guided lymph node (LN) dissection during robotic gastrectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Through July 2022, systematic searches of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were conducted to find studies comparing ICG fluorescence imaging with conventional treatment in patients with gastric cancer. The current meta-analysis was performed according to the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis guidelines. A pooled analysis was performed for the available data regarding the number of lymph node dissections, other operative outcomes and postoperative complications. R studio software 4.2.2 was used for this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

This analysis includes five studies with a total of 312 gastric cancer patients (128 in the ICG group and 184 in the non-ICG group). In this meta-analysis, the number of retrieved LNs in the ICG group was significantly higher (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 8.80, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 4.37-13.22, p < 0.05) than that in the non-ICG group with moderate heterogeneity (p < 0.0001, I2=53.3%). Intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications were all comparable and without significant heterogeneity. Additionally, ICG near-infrared fluorescent imaging was associated with a reduced operative time (WMD= -11.85, 95% CI: -22.40 to -1.30, p < 0.05) with low heterogeneity (p = 0.027, I2= 2.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

ICG near-infrared fluorescent imaging-guided lymphadenectomy was considered to be safe and effective in robotic gastrectomy. ICG was used to increase the number of LNs harvested while reducing operative time without increasing intraoperative blood loss or postoperative complications.

A suggested data structure for transparent and repeatable reporting of bibliographic searching

Academic searching is integral to research activities: (1) searching to retrieve specific information, (2) to expand our knowledge iteratively, (3) and to collate a representative and unbiased selection of the literature. Rigorous searching methods are vital for reliable, repeatable and unbiased searches needed for these second and third forms of searches (exploratory and systematic searching, respectively) that form a core part of evidence syntheses. Despite the broad awareness of the importance of transparency in reporting search activities in evidence syntheses, the importance of searching has been highlighted only recently and has been the explicit focus of reporting guidance (PRISMA-S). Ensuring bibliographic searches are reported in a way that is transparent enough to allow for full repeatability or evaluation is challenging for a number of reasons. Here, we detail these reasons and provide for the first time a standardised data structure for transparent and comprehensive reporting of search histories. This data structure was produced by a group of international experts in informatics and library sciences. We explain how the data structure was produced and describe its components in detail. We also demonstrate its practical applicability in tools designed to support literature review authors and explain how it can help to improve interoperability across tools used to manage literature reviews. We call on the research community and developers of reference and review management tools to embrace the data structure to facilitate adequate reporting of academic searching in an effort to raise the standard of evidence syntheses globally.

Restrictions and their reporting in systematic reviews of effectiveness: an observational study

Background

Restrictions in systematic reviews (SRs) can lead to bias and may affect conclusions. Therefore, it is important to report whether and which restrictions were used. This study aims to examine the use of restrictions regarding language, publication period, and study type, as well as the transparency of reporting in SRs of effectiveness.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was conducted with a random sample of 535 SRs of effectiveness indexed in PubMed between 2000 and 2019. The use of restrictions and their reporting were analysed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Of the total 535 SRs included, four out of every ten (41.3%) lacked information on at least one of the three restrictions considered (language, publication period, or study type). Overall, 14.6% of SRs did not provide information on restrictions regarding publication period, 19.1% regarding study type, and 18.3% regarding language. Of all included SRs, language was restricted in 46.4%, and in more than half of the SRs with restricted language (130/248), it was unclear whether the restriction was applied during either the search or the screening process, or both. The restrictions were justified for publication period in 22.2% of the respective SRs (33/149), study type in 6.5% (28/433), and language in 3.2% (8/248). Differences in reporting were found between countries as well as between Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews.

Conclusions

This study suggests that there is a lack of transparency in reporting on restrictions in SRs. Authors as well as editors and reviewers should be encouraged to improve the reporting and justification of restrictions to increase the transparency of SRs.

Safety and efficacy of indocyanine green near-infrared fluorescent imaging-guided lymph nodes dissection during radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging has been a new surgical navigation technique for gastric cancer. However, its clinical value should still be evaluated further. In this meta-analysis, we investigated the safety and efficacy of ICG near-infrared fluorescent imaging-guided lymph nodes (LNs) dissection during radical gastrectomy.

Methods

Studies comparing ICG fluorescence imaging with standard care in patients with gastric cancer were systematically searched from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library through August 2021. The current meta-analysis was performed according to the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis guidelines. A pooled analysis was performed for the available data regarding the number of LNs dissection, the number of metastatic LNs dissection, other operative outcomes, and postoperative complications. R software version 4.2.0 and Stata 16.0 software were used for the present meta-analysis.

Results

This analysis included 12 studies with a total of 1365 gastric cancer patients (569 in the ICG group and 796 in the non-ICG group). The number of retrieved LNs in the ICG group was significantly higher (weighted mean difference [WMD]=7.67, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 4.73 to 10.62, P&lt;0.05) compared to the non-ICG group with moderate heterogeneity (P&lt;0.001, I2 = 70%). The number of metastatic LNs, operative time, and postoperative complications were all comparable and without significant heterogeneity. Additionally, ICG near-infrared fluorescent imaging was associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss (WMD=-10.28, 95% CI: -15.22 to -5.35, P&lt;0.05) with low heterogeneity (P=0.07, I2 = 43%).

Conclusions

ICG near-infrared fluorescent imaging-guided lymphadenectomy was considered to be safe and effective in gastrectomy. ICG was used to increase the number of LNs harvested while reducing intraoperative blood loss without increasing operative time or postoperative complications.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42021291863.

PROTOCOL: Searching and reporting in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews: An assessment of current methods

This is the protocol for a Campbell review. The aim of this study is to comprehensively assess the quality and nature of the search methods and reporting across Campbell systematic reviews. The search methods used in systematic reviews provide the foundation for establishing the body of literature from which conclusions are drawn and recommendations made. Searches should be comprehensive and reporting of search methods should be transparent and reproducible. Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews strive to adhere to the best methodological guidance available for this type of searching. The current work aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of the quality of the search methods and reporting in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews. Our specific objectives include the following: To examine how searches are currently conducted in Campbell systematic reviews. To identify any machine learning or automation methods used, or emerging and less commonly used approaches to web searching. To examine how search strategies, search methods and search reporting adhere to the Methodological Expectations of Campbell Collaboration Intervention Reviews (MECCIR) and PRISMA guidelines. The findings will be used to identify opportunities for advancing current practices in Campbell reviews through updated guidance, peer review processes and author training and support.

Improving peer review of systematic reviews by involving librarians and information specialists: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Problems continue to exist with the reporting quality and risk of bias in search methods and strategies in systematic reviews and related review types. Peer reviewers who are not familiar with what is required to transparently and fully report a search may not be prepared to review the search components of systematic reviews, nor may they know what is likely to introduce bias into a search. Librarians and information specialists, who have expertise in searching, may offer specialized knowledge that would help improve systematic review search reporting and lessen risk of bias, but they are underutilized as methodological peer reviewers.

Methods

This study will evaluate the effect of adding librarians and information specialists as methodological peer reviewers on the quality of search reporting and risk of bias in systematic review searches. The study will be a pragmatic randomized controlled trial using 150 systematic review manuscripts submitted to BMJ and BMJ Open as the unit of randomization. Manuscripts that report on completed systematic reviews and related review types and have been sent for peer review are eligible. For each manuscript randomized to the intervention, a librarian/information specialist will be invited as an additional peer reviewer using standard practices for each journal. First revision manuscripts will be assessed in duplicate for reporting quality and risk of bias, using adherence to 4 items from PRISMA-S and assessors’ judgements on 4 signaling questions from ROBIS Domain 2, respectively. Identifying information from the manuscripts will be removed prior to assessment.

Discussion

The primary outcomes for this study are quality of reporting as indicated by differences in the proportion of adequately reported searches in first revision manuscripts between intervention and control groups and risk of bias as indicated by differences in the proportions of first revision manuscripts with high, low, and unclear bias. If the intervention demonstrates an effect on search reporting or bias, this may indicate a need for journal editors to work with librarians and information specialists as methodological peer reviewers.

Trial registration

Open Science Framework. Registered on June 17, 2021, at 10.17605/OSF.IO/W4CK2.

Safety and efficacy of indocyanine green fluorescence imaging-guided radical gastrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The clinical value of indocyanine green (ICG) in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy remains controversial. We performed this meta-analysis to investigate the safety and efficacy of ICG fluorescence imaging-guided radical gastrectomy.

METHODS

All relevant studies published until 30 October 2020 were retrieved from several databases. Fixed- and random-effects models were used to analyze the results based on different heterogeneity levels. Data were expressed as odds ratios or weighted mean differences along with 95% confidence intervals. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system scale was used for quality of evidence evaluation.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included six cohort studies that investigated 622 patients. Compared with conventional radical gastrectomy, ICG fluorescence imaging-guided gastrectomy facilitates complete lymph node dissection, reduces intraoperative blood loss, and shortens the length of postoperative hospitalization. Moreover, we observed no significant intergroup differences in the operative time, first exhaust time, and postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

ICG fluorescence imaging-guided radical gastrectomy scores over conventional gastrectomy and appears to be a promising approach in patients who require radical gastrectomy. However, further research is warranted to explore the potential long-term survival benefit of ICG fluorescence imaging in patients with gastric cancer.

A new method for testing reproducibility in systematic reviews was developed, but needs more testing

BACKGROUND

To develop and test an approach to test reproducibility of SRs.

METHODS

Case study. We have developed an approach to test reproducibility retrospectively while focusing on the whole conduct of an SR instead of single steps of it. We replicated the literature searches and drew a 25% random sample followed by study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias (ROB) assessments performed by two reviewers independently. These results were compared narratively with the original review.

RESULTS

We were not able to fully reproduce the original search resulting in minor differences in the number of citations retrieved. The biggest disagreements were found in study selection. The most difficult section to be reproduced was the RoB assessment due to the lack of reporting clear criteria to support the judgement of RoB ratings, although agreement was still found to be satisfactory.

CONCLUSION

Our approach as well as other approaches needs to undergo testing and comparison in the future as the area of testing for reproducibility of SRs is still in its infancy.

Quality of Literature Searches Published in Leading Neurosurgical Journals: A Review of Reviews

BACKGROUND

There is mounting evidence that the search strategies upon which systematic reviews (SRs) are based frequently contain errors are incompletely reported or insensitive.

OBJECTIVE

To appraise the quality of search strategies in the 10 leading specialty neurosurgical journals and identify factors associated with superior searches.

METHODS

This research-on-research study systematically surveyed SRs published in the 10 leading neurosurgical journals between 01/10/2017 and 31/10/2019. All SRs were eligible for assessment using a predefined coding manual that was adapted from the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA), a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR), and Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. The PubMed interface was used to search the MEDLINE database, which was supplemented by individual journal searches. Descriptive statistics were utilized to identify factors associated with improved search strategies.

RESULTS

A total of 633 articles were included and contained a median of 19.00 (2.00-1654.00) studies. Less than half (45.97%) of included search strategies were considered to be reproducible. Aggregated reporting score was positively associated with in-text reference to reporting guideline adherence (τb = 0.156, P < .01). The number of articles retrieved by a search (τb = 0.11, P < .01) was also associated with the reporting of a reproducible search strategy.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that the search strategies used in neurosurgical SRs require improvement. In addition to increasing awareness of reporting standards, we propose that this be achieved by the incorporation of PRISMA and other guidelines into article submission and peer-review processes. This may lead to the conduct of more informative SRs, which may result in improved clinician decision-making and patient outcomes.

MEDLINE search retrieval issues: A longitudinal query analysis of five vendor platforms

This study compared the results of data collected from a longitudinal query analysis of the MEDLINE database hosted on multiple platforms that include PubMed, EBSCOHost, Ovid, ProQuest, and Web of Science. The goal was to identify variations among the search results on the platforms after controlling for search query syntax. We devised twenty-nine cases of search queries comprised of five semantically equivalent queries per case to search against the five MEDLINE database platforms. We ran our queries monthly for a year and collected search result count data to observe changes. We found that search results varied considerably depending on MEDLINE platform. Reasons for variations were due to trends in scholarly publication such as publishing individual papers online first versus complete issues. Some other reasons were metadata differences in bibliographic records; differences in the levels of specificity of search fields provided by the platforms and large fluctuations in monthly search results based on the same query. Database integrity and currency issues were observed as each platform updated its MEDLINE data throughout the year. Specific biomedical bibliographic databases are used to inform clinical decision-making, create systematic reviews, and construct knowledge bases for clinical decision support systems. They serve as essential information retrieval and discovery tools to help identify and collect research data and are used in a broad range of fields and as the basis of multiple research designs. This study should help clinicians, researchers, librarians, informationists, and others understand how these platforms differ and inform future work in their standardization.

PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews. J Med Libr Assoc 2021;109:174-200. [PMID: 34285662 PMCID: PMC8270366 DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2021.962]

BACKGROUND

Literature searches underlie the foundations of systematic reviews and related review types. Yet, the literature searching component of systematic reviews and related review types is often poorly reported. Guidance for literature search reporting has been diverse and, in many cases, does not offer enough detail to authors who need more specific information about reporting search methods and information sources in a clear, reproducible way. This document presents the PRISMA-S (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses literature search extension) checklist, and explanation and elaboration.

METHODS

The checklist was developed using a three-stage Delphi survey process, followed by a consensus conference and public review process.

RESULTS

The final checklist includes sixteen reporting items, each of which is detailed with exemplar reporting and rationale.

CONCLUSIONS

The intent of PRISMA-S is to complement the PRISMA Statement and its extensions by providing a checklist that could be used by interdisciplinary authors, editors, and peer reviewers to verify that each component of a search is completely reported and, therefore, reproducible.

Community pharmacist interventions to improve adherence to lipid lowering medication and their influence on clinical outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Non-adherence is a major problem among patients with chronic diseases. Community pharmacists are ideally positioned to detect non-adherence and to provide patient-centred interventions.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of the impact of community pharmacist interventions on patient adherence to lipid lowering medication (LLM) prescriptions and clinical outcomes.

SEARCH METHOD

Five databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Knowledge) were searched systematically to identify relevant reports published by December 2019. Study quality was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB 2.0) tool.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled trials in which community pharmacists conducted an intervention to improve patient adherence to LLM and clinical outcomes were evaluated.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies (2408 participants) were included in the qualitative analysis. Four studies (n = 2266) were pooled in the meta-analysis. Participants in the intervention group (IG) had better adherence than those in the control group (CG) [odds ratio (OR) = 1.67; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38-2.02; P < 0.001; I² = 54%]. Better adherence rates were obtained when adherence was measured with validated questionnaires than when medication-possession ratio (MPR) measurements were used. Total cholesterol (TC) levels were not included in the meta-analysis due to data variability among the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacist-led intervention can improve LLM adherence, but its influence on clinical outcomes, including lipid level control, remains to be clarified.

PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

Literature searches underlie the foundations of systematic reviews and related review types. Yet, the literature searching component of systematic reviews and related review types is often poorly reported. Guidance for literature search reporting has been diverse, and, in many cases, does not offer enough detail to authors who need more specific information about reporting search methods and information sources in a clear, reproducible way. This document presents the PRISMA-S (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses literature search extension) checklist, and explanation and elaboration.

METHODS

The checklist was developed using a 3-stage Delphi survey process, followed by a consensus conference and public review process.

RESULTS

The final checklist includes 16 reporting items, each of which is detailed with exemplar reporting and rationale.

CONCLUSIONS

The intent of PRISMA-S is to complement the PRISMA Statement and its extensions by providing a checklist that could be used by interdisciplinary authors, editors, and peer reviewers to verify that each component of a search is completely reported and therefore reproducible.

Use of a search summary table to improve systematic review search methods, results, and efficiency

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews are comprehensive, robust, inclusive, transparent, and reproducible when bringing together the evidence to answer a research question. Various guidelines provide recommendations on the expertise required to conduct a systematic review, where and how to search for literature, and what should be reported in the published review. However, the finer details of the search results are not typically reported to allow the search methods or search efficiency to be evaluated.

CASE PRESENTATION

This case study presents a search summary table, containing the details of which databases were searched, which supplementary search methods were used, and where the included articles were found. It was developed and published alongside a recent systematic review. This simple format can be used in future systematic reviews to improve search results reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Publishing a search summary table in all systematic reviews would add to the growing evidence base about information retrieval, which would help in determining which databases to search for which type of review (in terms of either topic or scope), what supplementary search methods are most effective, what type of literature is being included, and where it is found. It would also provide evidence for future searching and search methods research.

Transhiatal versus transthoracic surgical approach for Siewert type Ⅱ adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

With the increasing prevalence of Siewert type Ⅱ adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ), the optimal surgical treatment is not universally agreed. This meta-analysis compares the safety and efficacy between the transhiahtal (TH) approach and the transthoracic (TT) approach.

METHODS

A systematic and electronic search of several databases was performed up to June 2020. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to evaluate article quality and funnel plots were created to identify potential publication bias. The random-effects model was used when significant heterogeneity was identified.

RESULTS

In total, nine retrospective studies and two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2331 patients were included. Decreased intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stay, lower incidence of pulmonary complications, and longer 3-year overall survival were observed in the TH group. There were no significant differences concerning duration of surgery, R0 resection rate, number of dissected lymph nodes, perioperative mortality and morbidity rate, abdominal complication rate, or anastomotic leak rate. With regard to 5-year overall survival, a potential benefit may be achieved with the TH approach, which requires further confirmation.

CONCLUSION

In terms of surgery-related and long-term outcomes, the TH approach may be more appropriate for Siewert type Ⅱ adenocarcinoma of EGJ, especially for esophagus invasion ≤4 cm.

Are clinical practice guidelines for low back pain interventions of high quality and updated? A systematic review using the AGREE II instrument

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) provide recommendations for practice, but the proliferation of CPGs issued by multiple organisations in recent years has raised concern about their quality. The aim of this study was to systematically appraise CPGs quality for low back pain (LBP) interventions and to explore inter-rater reliability (IRR) between quality appraisers. The time between systematic review search and publication of CPGs was recorded.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, PEDro, TRIP), guideline organisation databases, websites, and grey literature were searched from January 2016 to January 2020 to identify GPCs on rehabilitative, pharmacological or surgical intervention for LBP management. Four independent reviewers used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool to evaluate CPGs quality and record the year the CPGs were published and the year the search strategies were conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 21 CPGs met the inclusion criteria and were appraised. Seven (33%) were broad in scope and involved surgery, rehabilitation or pharmacological intervention. The score for each AGREE II item was: Editorial Independence (median 67%, interquartile range [IQR] 31-84%), Scope and Purpose (median 64%, IQR 22-83%), Rigour of Development (median 50%, IQR 21-72%), Clarity and Presentation (median 50%, IQR 28-79%), Stakeholder Involvement (median 36%, IQR 10-74%), and Applicability (median 11%, IQR 0-46%). The IRR between the assessors was nearly perfect (interclass correlation 0.90; 95% confidence interval 0.88-0.91). The median time span was 2 years (range, 1-4), however, 38% of the CPGs did not report the coverage dates for systematic searches.

CONCLUSIONS

We found methodological limitations that affect CPGs quality. In our opinion, a universal database is needed in which guidelines can be registered and recommendations dynamically developed through a living systematic reviews approach to ensure that guidelines are based on updated evidence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 TRIAL REGISTRATION: REGISTRATION PROSPERO DETAILS: CRD42019127619 .

Immunosuppressive drugs to reduce the mortality rate in patients with moderate to severe paraquat poisoning: A Meta-analysis

The benefits and adverse effects of immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs) in patients with paraquat (PQ) poisoning have not been thoroughly assessed. This meta-analysis study aims to evaluate the effect of ISDs in patients with moderate to severe PQ poisoning. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline, CNKI and Wanfang Data from inception to January 2019. The Mantel-Haenszel method with a random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) as described by DerSimonian and Laird. An L'Abbé plot was drawn to explore the relationship between the degree of poisoning and mortality. Four randomized controlled trials, two prospective and seven retrospective studies were identified. ISDs were significantly associated with reduced mortality (RR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.58-0.99) and the incidence rate of multiple-organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) (RR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48-0.83) in patients with moderate to severe PQ poisoning. They were not associated with an increased incidence rate of hepatitis and reduced incidence rate of acute renal failure and hypoxia. The L'Abbé plot results showed a slight increase in mortality rate in the ISD group with increased mortality in the placebo group. This indicates a possible advantage of ISDs in most of the patients with severe PQ poisoning. These findings suggest that ISDs may reduce the mortality and incidence rate of MODS in moderate to severe PQ poisoning patients, and severe PQ poisoning patients might benefit more from ISDs.

Conduct and reporting of citation searching in Cochrane systematic reviews: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The search for studies for a systematic review should be conducted systematically and reported transparently to facilitate reproduction. This study aimed to report on the conduct and reporting of backward citation searching (ie, checking reference lists) and forward citation searching in a cross section of Cochrane reviews. Citation searching uses the citation network surrounding a source study to identify additional studies.

METHODS

Cochrane reviews were identified by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews using the wildcard symbol and date limiting to the 3-month period November 2016 to January 2017. Cochrane reviews thus identified were screened for mention of citation searching. Descriptive detail on the conduct and reporting of citation searching was captured in data extraction forms and described and evaluated.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifteen Cochrane reviews were identified. One hundred seventy-two reviews reported backward citation searching, and 18 reviews reported forward citation searching. Web of Science was the most frequently reported citation index. The studies used for backward citation searching consisted mainly of studies meeting the inclusion criteria. One-third of reviews that reported forward citation searching used selected studies of importance. Reporting of citation searching was compliant with the Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) standards, but full transparency requires additional detail that only a minority of reviews reported.

CONCLUSION

The conduct of backward citation searching was more uniform than forward citation searching. This might be due to lack of MECIR guidance for forward citation searching. Reporting was generally compliant with MECIR, but this is not always sufficient to ensure full transparency.

Prior exercise training and experimental myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Exercising prior to experimental infarction may have beneficial effects on the heart. The objective of this study was to analyze studies on animals that had exercised prior to myocardial infarction and to examine any benefits through a systematic review and meta-analysis. The databases MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane were consulted. We analyzed articles published between January 1978 and November 2018. From a total of 858 articles, 13 manuscripts were selected in this review. When animals exercised before experimental infarction, there was a reduction in mortality, a reduction in infarct size, improvements in cardiac function, and a better molecular balance between genes and proteins that exhibit cardiac protective effects. Analyzing heart weight/body weight, we observed the following results - Mean difference 95% CI - -0.02 [-0.61,0.57]. Meta-analysis of the infarct size (% of the left ventricle) revealed a statistically significant decrease in the size of the infarction in animals that exercised before myocardial infarction, in comparison with the sedentary animals -5.05 [-7.68, -2.40]. Analysis of the ejection fraction, measured by echo (%), revealed that animals that exercised before myocardial infarction exhibited higher and statistically significant measures, compared with sedentary animals 8.77 [3.87,13.66]. We conclude that exercise performed prior to experimental myocardial infarction confers cardiac benefits to animals.

A Computational Approach for Objectively Derived Systematic Review Search Strategies

Searching literature for a systematic review begins with a manually constructed search strategy by an expert information specialist. The typical process of constructing search strategies is often undocumented, ad-hoc, and subject to individual expertise, which may introduce bias in the systematic review. A new method for objectively deriving search strategies has arisen from information specialists attempting to address these shortcomings. However, this proposed method still presents a number of manual, ad-hoc interventions, and trial-and-error processes, potentially still introducing bias into systematic reviews. Moreover, this method has not been rigorously evaluated on a large set of systematic review cases, thus its generalisability is unknown. In this work, we present a computational adaptation of this proposed objective method. Our adaptation removes the human-in-the-loop processes involved in the initial steps of creating a search strategy for a systematic review; reducing bias due to human factors and increasing the objectivity of the originally proposed method. Our proposed computational adaptation further enables a formal and rigorous evaluation over a large set of systematic reviews. We find that our computational adaptation of the original objective method provides an effective starting point for information specialists to continue refining. We also identify a number of avenues for extending and improving our adaptation to further promote supporting information specialists.

What are Systematic Reviews?

Systematic reviews are a type of review that uses repeatable analytical methods to collect secondary data and analyse it. Systematic reviews are a type of evidence synthesis which formulate research questions that are broad or narrow in scope, and identify and synthesize data that directly relate to the systematic review question. While some people might associate ‘systematic review’ with 'meta-analysis', there are multiple kinds of review which can be defined as ‘systematic’ which do not involve a meta-analysis. Some systematic reviews critically appraise research studies, and synthesize findings qualitatively or quantitatively. Systematic reviews are often designed to provide an exhaustive summary of current evidence relevant to a research question. For example, systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials are an important way of informing evidence-based medicine, and a review of existing studies is often quicker and cheaper than embarking on a new study. While systematic reviews are often applied in the biomedical or healthcare context, they can be used in other areas where an assessment of a precisely defined subject would be helpful. Systematic reviews may examine clinical tests, public health interventions, environmental interventions, social interventions, adverse effects, qualitative evidence syntheses, methodological reviews, policy reviews, and economic evaluations. An understanding of systematic reviews and how to implement them in practice is highly recommended for professionals involved in the delivery of health care, public health and public policy.

The effect of hypoglycaemia during hospital admission on health-related outcomes for people with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To assess the health-related outcomes of hypoglycaemia for people with diabetes admitted to hospital; specifically, hospital length of stay and mortality.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies relating to hypoglycaemia (< 4 mmol/l) for hospitalized adults (≥ 16 years) with diabetes reporting the primary outcomes of interest, hospital length of stay or mortality. Final papers for inclusion were reviewed in duplicate and the adjusted results of each were pooled, using a random effects model then undergoing further prespecified subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 15 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled mean difference in length of stay for ward-based inpatients exposed to hypoglycaemia was 4.1 days longer [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.36 to 5.79; I² = 99%] compared with those without hypoglycaemia. This association remained robust across the pre-specified subgroup analyses. The pooled relative risk (RR) of in-hospital mortality was greater for those exposed to hypoglycaemia (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.64 to 2.67; I² = 94%, n = 7 studies) but not in intensive care unit mortality (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.16; I² =0%, n = 2 studies).

CONCLUSION

There is an association between inpatient hypoglycaemia and longer length of stay and greater in-hospital mortality. Studies examining this association were heterogenous in terms of both clinical populations and effect size, but the overall direction of the association was consistent. Therefore, glucose concentration should be considered a potential tool to aid the identification of inpatients at risk of poor health-related outcomes.

lilacs search strategy for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies

BACKGROUND

There are few publications on search strategies to identify diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies in lilacs.

OBJECTIVE

To translate and customise medline search strategies for use in lilacs and assess their retrieval of studies in Cochrane DTA systematic reviews.

METHOD

We developed a six-step process to translate and customise medline search strategies for use in lilacs (iAHx interface). We identified medline search strategies of published Cochrane DTA reviews, translated/customised them for use in lilacs, ran searches in lilacs and compared the retrieval results of our translated search strategy versus the one used in the published reviews.

RESULTS

Our lilacs search strategies translated/customised from the medline strategies retrieved studies in 70 Cochrane DTA reviews. Only 29 of these reviews stated that they had searched the lilacs database and 21 published their lilacs search strategies. Few had used the lilacs database search tools, none exploded the subject headings, and 86% used only English terms.

CONCLUSION

Translating and tailoring a medline search strategy for the lilacs database resulted in the retrieval of DTA studies that would have been missed otherwise.

Errors in search strategies used in systematic reviews and their effects on information retrieval

OBJECTIVES

Errors in search strategies negatively affect the quality and validity of systematic reviews. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate searches performed in MEDLINE/PubMed to identify errors and determine their effects on information retrieval.

METHODS

A PubMed search was conducted using the systematic review filter to identify articles that were published in January of 2018. Systematic reviews or meta-analyses were selected from a systematic search for literature containing reproducible and explicit search strategies in MEDLINE/PubMed. Data were extracted from these studies related to ten types of errors and to the terms and phrases search modes.

RESULTS

The study included 137 systematic reviews in which the number of search strategies containing some type of error was very high (92.7%). Errors that affected recall were the most frequent (78.1%), and the most common search errors involved missing terms in both natural language and controlled language and those related to Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) search terms and the non-retrieval of their more specific terms.

CONCLUSIONS

To improve the quality of searches and avoid errors, it is essential to plan the search strategy carefully, which includes consulting the MeSH database to identify the concepts and choose all appropriate terms, both descriptors and synonyms, and combining search techniques in the free-text and controlled-language fields, truncating the terms appropriately to retrieve all their variants.

Bubble effect: including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility

BACKGROUND

Using internet search engines (such as Google search) in systematic literature reviews is increasingly becoming a ubiquitous part of search methodology. In order to integrate the vast quantity of available knowledge, literature mostly focuses on systematic reviews, considered to be principal sources of scientific evidence at all practical levels. Any possible individual methodological flaws present in these systematic reviews have the potential to become systemic.

MAIN TEXT

This particular bias, that could be referred to as (re)search bubble effect, is introduced because of inherent, personalized nature of internet search engines that tailors results according to derived user preferences based on unreproducible criteria. In other words, internet search engines adjust their user's beliefs and attitudes, leading to the creation of a personalized (re)search bubble, including entries that have not been subjected to rigorous peer review process. The internet search engine algorithms are in a state of constant flux, producing differing results at any given moment, even if the query remains identical. There are many more subtle ways of introducing unwanted variations and synonyms of search queries that are used autonomously, detached from user insight and intent. Even the most well-known and respected systematic literature reviews do not seem immune to the negative implications of the search bubble effect, affecting reproducibility.

CONCLUSION

Although immensely useful and justified by the need for encompassing the entirety of knowledge, the practice of including internet search engines in systematic literature reviews is fundamentally irreconcilable with recent emphasis on scientific reproducibility and rigor, having a profound impact on the discussion of the limits of scientific epistemology. Scientific research that is not reproducible, may still be called science, but represents one that should be avoided. Our recommendation is to use internet search engines as an additional literature source, primarily in order to validate initial search strategies centered on bibliographic databases.

Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies

BACKGROUND

Systematic literature searching is recognised as a critical component of the systematic review process. It involves a systematic search for studies and aims for a transparent report of study identification, leaving readers clear about what was done to identify studies, and how the findings of the review are situated in the relevant evidence. Information specialists and review teams appear to work from a shared and tacit model of the literature search process. How this tacit model has developed and evolved is unclear, and it has not been explicitly examined before. The purpose of this review is to determine if a shared model of the literature searching process can be detected across systematic review guidance documents and, if so, how this process is reported in the guidance and supported by published studies.

METHOD

A literature review. Two types of literature were reviewed: guidance and published studies. Nine guidance documents were identified, including: The Cochrane and Campbell Handbooks. Published studies were identified through 'pearl growing', citation chasing, a search of PubMed using the systematic review methods filter, and the authors' topic knowledge. The relevant sections within each guidance document were then read and re-read, with the aim of determining key methodological stages. Methodological stages were identified and defined. This data was reviewed to identify agreements and areas of unique guidance between guidance documents. Consensus across multiple guidance documents was used to inform selection of 'key stages' in the process of literature searching.

RESULTS

Eight key stages were determined relating specifically to literature searching in systematic reviews. They were: who should literature search, aims and purpose of literature searching, preparation, the search strategy, searching databases, supplementary searching, managing references and reporting the search process.

CONCLUSIONS

Eight key stages to the process of literature searching in systematic reviews were identified. These key stages are consistently reported in the nine guidance documents, suggesting consensus on the key stages of literature searching, and therefore the process of literature searching as a whole, in systematic reviews. Further research to determine the suitability of using the same process of literature searching for all types of systematic review is indicated.

Identification of problems in search strategies in Cochrane Reviews

OBJECTIVE

Search strategies are essential for the adequate retrieval of studies in a systematic review (SR). Our objective was to identify problems in the design and reporting of search strategies in a sample of new Cochrane SRs first published in The Cochrane Library in 2015.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We took a random sample of 70 new Cochrane SRs of interventions published in 2015. We evaluated their design and reporting of search strategies using the recommendations from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, the Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews, and the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies evidence-based guideline.

RESULTS

Most reviews complied with the reporting standards in the Cochrane Handbook and the Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews; however, 8 SRs did not search trials registers, 3 SRs included language restrictions, and there was inconsistent reporting of contact with individuals and searches of the gray literature. We found problems in the design of the search strategies in 73% of reviews (95% CI, 60-84%) and 53% of these contained problems (95% CI, 38-69%) that could limit both the sensitivity and precision of the search strategies.

CONCLUSION

We found limitations in the design and reporting of search strategies. We consider that a greater adherence to the guidelines could improve their quality.

The methodological quality of systematic reviews indexed in the MEDLINE database

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to describe and analyse the methodology quality of the literature search protocols of systematic reviews and to assess the relevance of the search filter that applies PubMed for retrieving this type of publication of the MEDLINE database.

Design/methodology/approach

For the selection of the document type, a literature search about nutritional and metabolic diseases was carried out in MEDLINE and the PubMed filter was used for retrieving “Systematic Reviews”, selecting “Nutritional and Metabolic Diseases” from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) database as Major Topic to determine the area of knowledge. Data analysis was carried out using “External Logistic Biplot”, a novel multivariate statistical technique in the field of medical documentation.

Findings

The results highlight the large variability of the methodology used in the literature search protocols of the systematic reviews analysed and confirm the low precision of the filter used by PubMed for the recovery of systematic reviews.

Originality/value

The Logistic Biplot used in this research allows an optimal categorization of the different documentary typologies and classifies the documents by their methodological quality, demonstrating its usefulness for the future development of the bibliometric analysis.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy produces better outcomes for hepatolithiasis than open hepatectomy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The present meta-analysis focused on comparing the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) versus open hepatectomy (OH) for hepatolithiasis. In detail, short-term outcomes including operative time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion, postoperative time to oral intake, length of hospital stay, overall postoperative complication rate, initial residual stone, and stone recurrence were analyzed systematically.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched for eligible studies up to Jun. 30. 2017. Bibliographic citation management software (EndNoteX7) was applied to literature management. Quality assessment was carried out according to the modification of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The data were analyzed by Stata SE12.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX). Sensitivity analysis was conducted by deleting single study step by step. Odds ratio (OR) were calculated for dichotomous data, and standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was calculated continuous data.

RESULTS

= 0%; P = 0.22). In addition, our stratified analysis according to types of LH indicated that the laparoscopic approach still produced more favorable outcomes whatever patients underwent left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) or left hemihepatectomy (LHH).

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic hepatectomy is a better alternative to open approach in patients with hepatolithiasis, providing less overall complication rate, shorter postoperative stay of hospital stay, less blood loss, and shorter time to oral intake. However, high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are badly needed to provide higher-level evidence due to unavoidable bias from non-randomized trials.

Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review

Objective

What roles do librarians and information professionals play in conducting systematic reviews? Librarians are increasingly called upon to be involved in systematic reviews, but no study has considered all the roles librarians can perform. This inventory of existing and emerging roles aids in defining librarians’ systematic reviews services.

Methods

For this scoping review, the authors conducted controlled vocabulary and text-word searches in the PubMed; Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts; and CINAHL databases. We separately searched for articles published in the Journal of the European Association for Health Information and Libraries, Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, the Journal of the Canadian Heath Libraries Association, and Hypothesis. We also text-word searched Medical Library Association annual meeting poster and paper abstracts.

Results

We identified 18 different roles filled by librarians and other information professionals in conducting systematic reviews from 310 different articles, book chapters, and presented papers and posters. Some roles were well known such as searching, source selection, and teaching. Other less documented roles included planning, question formulation, and peer review. We summarize these different roles and provide an accompanying bibliography of references for in-depth descriptions of these roles.

Conclusion

Librarians play central roles in systematic review teams, including roles that go beyond searching. This scoping review should encourage librarians who are fulfilling roles that are not captured here to document their roles in journal articles and poster and paper presentations.

Laparoscopic VS open hepatectomy for hepatolithiasis: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To perform a meta-analysis on laparoscopic hepatectomy VS conventional liver resection for treating hepatolithiasis.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, and undertook a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic hepatectomy VS conventional open liver resection for local hepatolithiasis in the left or right lobe. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes (time, estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, postoperative intestinal function recovery time, length of hospital stay, postoperative complication rate, initial residual stone, final residual stone and stone recurrence) were analyzed systematically.

RESULTS

A comprehensive literature search retrieved 16 publications with a total of 1329 cases. Meta-analysis of these studies showed that the laparoscopic approach for hepatolithiasis was associated with significantly less intraoperative estimated blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD): 61.56, 95% confidence interval (CI): 14.91-108.20, P = 0.01], lower blood transfusion rate [odds ratio (OR): 0.41, 95%CI: 0.22-0.79, P = 0.008], shorter intestinal function recovery time (WMD: 0.98, 95%CI: 0.47-1.48, P = 0.01), lower total postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.52, 95%CI: 0.39-0.70, P < 0.0001) and shorter stay in hospital (WMD: 3.32, 95%CI: 2.32-4.32, P < 0.00001). In addition, our results showed no significant differences between the two groups in operative time (WMD: 21.49, 95%CI: 0.27-43.24, P = 0.05), residual stones (OR: 0.79, 95%CI: 0.50-1.25, P = 0.31) and stone recurrence (OR: 0.34, 95%CI: 0.11-1.08, P = 0.07). Furthermore, with subgroups analysis, our results proved that the laparoscopic approach for hepatolithiasis in the left lateral lobe and left side could achieve satisfactory therapeutic effects.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach is safe and effective, with less intraoperative estimated blood loss, fewer postoperative complications, reduced length of hospital stay and shorter intestinal function recovery time than with conventional approaches.

A review of the reporting of web searching to identify studies for Cochrane systematic reviews

The literature searches that are used to identify studies for inclusion in a systematic review should be comprehensively reported. This ensures that the literature searches are transparent and reproducible, which is important for assessing the strengths and weaknesses of a systematic review and re-running the literature searches when conducting an update review. Web searching using search engines and the websites of topically relevant organisations is sometimes used as a supplementary literature search method. Previous research has shown that the reporting of web searching in systematic reviews often lacks important details and is thus not transparent or reproducible. Useful details to report about web searching include the name of the search engine or website, the URL, the date searched, the search strategy, and the number of results. This study reviews the reporting of web searching to identify studies for Cochrane systematic reviews published in the 6-month period August 2016 to January 2017 (n = 423). Of these reviews, 61 reviews reported using web searching using a search engine or website as a literature search method. In the majority of reviews, the reporting of web searching was found to lack essential detail for ensuring transparency and reproducibility, such as the search terms. Recommendations are made on how to improve the reporting of web searching in Cochrane systematic reviews.

Expert Search Strategies: The Information Retrieval Practices of Healthcare Information Professionals

BACKGROUND

Healthcare information professionals play a key role in closing the knowledge gap between medical research and clinical practice. Their work involves meticulous searching of literature databases using complex search strategies that can consist of hundreds of keywords, operators, and ontology terms. This process is prone to error and can lead to inefficiency and bias if performed incorrectly.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the search behavior of healthcare information professionals, uncovering their needs, goals, and requirements for information retrieval systems.

METHODS

A survey was distributed to healthcare information professionals via professional association email discussion lists. It investigated the search tasks they undertake, their techniques for search strategy formulation, their approaches to evaluating search results, and their preferred functionality for searching library-style databases. The popular literature search system PubMed was then evaluated to determine the extent to which their needs were met.

RESULTS

The 107 respondents indicated that their information retrieval process relied on the use of complex, repeatable, and transparent search strategies. On average it took 60 minutes to formulate a search strategy, with a search task taking 4 hours and consisting of 15 strategy lines. Respondents reviewed a median of 175 results per search task, far more than they would ideally like (100). The most desired features of a search system were merging search queries and combining search results.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare information professionals routinely address some of the most challenging information retrieval problems of any profession. However, their needs are not fully supported by current literature search systems and there is demand for improved functionality, in particular regarding the development and management of search strategies.

Methodological Standards for Meta-Analyses and Qualitative Systematic Reviews of Cardiac Prevention and Treatment Studies: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Meta-analyses are becoming increasingly popular, especially in the fields of cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment. They are often considered to be a reliable source of evidence for making healthcare decisions. Unfortunately, problems among meta-analyses such as the misapplication and misinterpretation of statistical methods and tests are long-standing and widespread. The purposes of this statement are to review key steps in the development of a meta-analysis and to provide recommendations that will be useful for carrying out meta-analyses and for readers and journal editors, who must interpret the findings and gauge methodological quality. To make the statement practical and accessible, detailed descriptions of statistical methods have been omitted. Based on a survey of cardiovascular meta-analyses, published literature on methodology, expert consultation, and consensus among the writing group, key recommendations are provided. Recommendations reinforce several current practices, including protocol registration; comprehensive search strategies; methods for data extraction and abstraction; methods for identifying, measuring, and dealing with heterogeneity; and statistical methods for pooling results. Other practices should be discontinued, including the use of levels of evidence and evidence hierarchies to gauge the value and impact of different study designs (including meta-analyses) and the use of structured tools to assess the quality of studies to be included in a meta-analysis. We also recommend choosing a pooling model for conventional meta-analyses (fixed effect or random effects) on the basis of clinical and methodological similarities among studies to be included, rather than the results of a test for statistical heterogeneity.

Compliance of systematic reviews in veterinary journals with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) literature search reporting guidelines

Objective

Complete, accurate reporting of systematic reviews facilitates assessment of how well reviews have been conducted. The primary objective of this study was to examine compliance of systematic reviews in veterinary journals with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines for literature search reporting and to examine the completeness, bias, and reproducibility of the searches in these reviews from what was reported. The second objective was to examine reporting of the credentials and contributions of those involved in the search process.

Methods

A sample of systematic reviews or meta-analyses published in veterinary journals between 2011 and 2015 was obtained by searching PubMed. Reporting in the full text of each review was checked against certain PRISMA checklist items.

Results

Over one-third of reviews (37%) did not search the CAB Abstracts database, and 9% of reviews searched only 1 database. Over two-thirds of reviews (65%) did not report any search for grey literature or stated that they excluded grey literature. The majority of reviews (95%) did not report a reproducible search strategy.

Conclusions

Most reviews had significant deficiencies in reporting the search process that raise questions about how these searches were conducted and ultimately cast serious doubts on the validity and reliability of reviews based on a potentially biased and incomplete body of literature. These deficiencies also highlight the need for veterinary journal editors and publishers to be more rigorous in requiring adherence to PRISMA guidelines and to encourage veterinary researchers to include librarians or information specialists on systematic review teams to improve the quality and reporting of searches.

VP200 Untangling What Information Specialists Should Document and Report

INTRODUCTION:

Thorough documentation and clear reporting are essential when conducting a comprehensive literature search for a health technology assessment (HTA) or systematic review. The ultimate goal of this process is transparency and reproducibility with the added benefit of increasing the reader's confidence in the research. Thorough documentation of the search also allows for critical appraisal of the methodology used and facilitates future updating of a review (1,2).

It has been found that large numbers of systematic review searches are inadequately documented and there is little consensus on best practices for reporting standards (3).

As part of the SuRe Info Project, we conducted a review of all current reporting standards relevant to HTAs and systematic reviews in addition to looking at the published literature on this topic in order to synthesize the evidence in this area and create a standard set of agreed upon recommendations.

METHODS:

We conducted a comprehensive search of Medline, Embase, and LISA (Library & Info Studies Abstracts) databases. We also examined the Equator Network (http://www.equator-network.org/) website. Reference lists of included studies and reporting guidelines were also consulted. Eleven reporting guidelines and eight studies were included in the review by two independent reviewers. Anything published before 2006, that was not a research article (other than the guidelines), and/or that did not provide new recommendations (that is, a review of another set of recommendations) was excluded.

RESULTS:

After collecting data on the suggested reporting elements described in the literature, we pooled our results to create an overarching list of the most commonly recommended elements to describe and the most commonly recommended methods to use when documenting a comprehensive search. Not only did these elements pertain to documenting the search strategy for the final report, but they also pertained to the protocol and the abstract of a review.

CONCLUSIONS:

It is hoped that this overview of the literature and compilation of the evidence will clarify some of the confusion that seems to exist when documenting and reporting searches and perhaps it will even help to reduce the existence of poorly described strategies in the research literature.

A meta-ethnography of interview-based qualitative research studies on medical students' views and experiences of empathy

BACKGROUND

Quantitative research suggests that medical students' empathy declines during their training. This meta-ethnography asks: What new understanding may be gained by a synthesis of interview-based qualitative research on medical students' views and experiences of empathy? How can such a synthesis be undertaken?

METHODOLOGY

A meta-ethnography synthesizes individual qualitative studies to generate knowledge increasing understanding and informing debate. A literature search yielded eight qualitative studies which met the inclusion criteria. These were analyzed from a phenomenological and interpretative perspective.

RESULTS

The meta-ethnography revealed a conceptual confusion around empathy and a tension in medical education between distancing and connecting with patients. Barriers to empathy included a lack of patient contact and a strong emphasis on the biomedical over the psycho-social aspects of the curriculum. A number of influences discussed in the paper lead students to adopt less overt ways of showing their empathy.

CONCLUSION

These insights deepen our understanding of the apparent decline in empathy in medical students. The lessons from these studies suggest that future curriculum development should include earlier patient contact, more emphasis on psycho-social aspects of care and address the barriers to empathy to ensure that tomorrow's doctors are empathetic as well as competent.

How to prepare a systematic review of economic evaluations for informing evidence-based healthcare decisions: a five-step approach (part 1/3)

INTRODUCTION

Systematic reviews of economic evaluations are useful for synthesizing economic evidence about health interventions and for informing evidence-based decisions. Areas covered: As there is no detailed description of the methods for performing a systematic review of economic evidence, this paper aims to provide an overview of state-of-the-art methodology. This is laid out in a 5-step approach, as follows: step 1) initiating a systematic review; step 2) identifying (full) economic evaluations; step 3) data extraction, risk of bias and transferability assessment; step 4) reporting results; step 5) discussion and interpretation of findings. Expert commentary: The paper aims to help inexperienced reviewers and clinical practice guideline developers, but also to be a resource for experts in the field who want to check on current methodological developments.

Reproducibility of Search Strategies Is Poor in Systematic Reviews Published in High-Impact Pediatrics, Cardiology and Surgery Journals: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background

A high-quality search strategy is considered an essential component of systematic reviews but many do not contain reproducible search strategies. It is unclear if low reproducibility spans medical disciplines, is affected by librarian/search specialist involvement or has improved with increased awareness of reporting guidelines.

Objectives

To examine the reporting of search strategies in systematic reviews published in Pediatrics, Surgery or Cardiology journals in 2012 and determine rates and predictors of including a reproducible search strategy.

Methods

We identified all systematic reviews published in 2012 in the ten highest impact factor journals in Pediatrics, Surgery and Cardiology. Each search strategy was coded to indicate what elements were reported and whether the overall search was reproducible. Reporting and reproducibility rates were compared across disciplines and we measured the influence of librarian/search specialist involvement, discipline or endorsement of a reporting guideline on search reproducibility.

Results

272 articles from 25 journals were included. Reporting of search elements ranged widely from 91% of articles naming search terms to 33% providing a full search strategy and 22% indicating the date the search was executed. Only 22% of articles provided at least one reproducible search strategy and 13% provided a reproducible strategy for all databases searched in the article. Librarians or search specialists were reported as involved in 17% of articles. There were strong disciplinary differences on the reporting of search elements. In the multivariable analysis, only discipline (Pediatrics) was a significant predictor of the inclusion of a reproducible search strategy.

Conclusions

Despite recommendations to report full, reproducible search strategies, many articles still do not. In addition, authors often report a single strategy as covering all databases searched, further decreasing reproducibility. Further research is needed to determine how disciplinary culture may encourage reproducibility and the role that journal editors and peer reviewers could play.

Identifying Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Search Terminology: A Systematic Review of Health Systematic Reviews

Research on the health of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) populations can provide important information to address existing health inequalities. Finding existing research in LGBT health can prove challenging due to the plethora of terminology used. We sought to describe existing search strategies and to identify more comprehensive LGBT search terminology. We iteratively created a search string to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses about LGBT health and implemented it in Embase, PubMed/MEDLINE, and PsycINFO databases on May 28–29, 2015. We hand-searched the journal LGBT Health. Inclusion criteria were: systematic reviews and meta-analyses that addressed LGBT health, used systematic searching, and used independent coders for inclusion. The published search terminology in each record and search strings provided by authors on request were cross-referenced with our original search to identify additional terminology. Our search process identified 19 systematic reviews meeting inclusion criteria. The number of search terms used to identify LGBT-related records ranged from 1 to 31. From the included studies, we identified 46 new search terms related to LGBT health. We removed five search terms as inappropriate and added five search terms used in the field. The resulting search string included 82 terms. There is room to improve the quality of searching and reporting in LGBT health systematic reviews. Future work should attempt to enhance the positive predictive value of LGBT health searches. Our findings can assist LGBT health reviewers in capturing the diversity of LGBT terminology when searching.