Assessing the applicability of findings in systematic reviews of complex interventions can enhance the utility of reviews for decision making

被引:57
|
作者
Burford, Belinda [1 ,2 ]
Lewin, Simon [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Welch, Vivian [6 ,7 ,8 ]
Rehfuess, Eva [9 ]
Waters, Elizabeth [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Melbourne, Cochrane Publ Hlth Grp, Melbourne Sch Populat & Global Hlth, Carlton, Vic 3010, Australia
[2] Univ Melbourne, Jack Brockhoff Child Hlth & Wellbeing Program, Melbourne Sch Populat & Global Hlth, Carlton, Vic 3010, Australia
[3] Norwegian Satellite Cochrane Effect Practice & Or, N-0176 Oslo, Norway
[4] Norwegian Knowledge Ctr Hlth Serv, Global Hlth Unit, N-0176 Oslo, Norway
[5] Med Res Council South Africa, Hlth Syst Res Unit, ZA-7500 Cape Town, South Africa
[6] Univ Ottawa, Bruyere Res Inst, Ottawa, ON K1N 5C, Canada
[7] Univ Ottawa, Inst Populat Hlth, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
[8] Ottawa Hosp Res Inst, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4E9, Canada
[9] Univ Munich, Inst Med Informat Biometry & Epidemiol, D-81377 Munich, Germany
关键词
Applicability; Systematic review; Complex intervention; Generalizability; External validity; Transferability; Intervention implementation; TAXONOMY; TRANSFERABILITY; CONSENSUS; QUALITY; IMPROVE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.06.017
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Assessment of applicability is an essential part of the systematic review process. In the context of systematic reviews of the effects of interventions, applicability is an assessment of whether the findings of a review can be applied in a particular context or population. For more complex interventions, assessing applicability can be challenging because of greater diversity of, and interactions within and between, the intended population, intervention components, comparison conditions, and outcomes as well as a range of further considerations related to intervention context and theoretical basis. We recommend that review authors plan and conduct analyses to explain variations in effect and answer questions about mechanisms of action and influence of different settings, contexts, and populations. We also recommend that review authors provide rich descriptions of the setting, implementation details, resource use, and contexts of included studies and assess applicability for at least one target population, setting, and context. This should facilitate applicability assessments by end users. Consensus on terminology is needed and guidance should be developed for the synthesis of implementation information within reviews as well as the documentation of applicability judgments by review authors. (c) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1251 / 1261
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Interventions Encouraging the Use of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Decision-Making: A Systematic Review
    Perrier, Laure
    Mrklas, Kelly
    Shepperd, Sasha
    Dobbins, Maureen
    McKibbon, K. Ann
    Straus, Sharon E.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2011, 26 (04) : 419 - 426
  • [2] Interventions Encouraging the Use of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Decision-Making: A Systematic Review
    Laure Perrier
    Kelly Mrklas
    Sasha Shepperd
    Maureen Dobbins
    K. Ann McKibbon
    Sharon E. Straus
    [J]. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2011, 26 : 419 - 426
  • [3] How consumers and policymakers can use systematic reviews for decision making
    Bero, LA
    Jadad, AR
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1997, 127 (01) : 37 - 42
  • [4] How stakeholder participation can contribute to systematic reviews of complex interventions
    Harris, J.
    Croot, L.
    Thompson, J.
    Springett, J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY AND COMMUNITY HEALTH, 2016, 70 (02) : 207 - 214
  • [5] Systematic reviews: a basis for clinical decision making
    不详
    [J]. VETERINARY RECORD, 2003, 152 (17) : 517 - 517
  • [6] The quality of systematic reviews about interventions for refractive error can be improved: a review of systematic reviews
    Mayo-Wilson, Evan
    Ng, Sueko Matsumura
    Chuck, Roy S.
    Li, Tianjing
    [J]. BMC OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2017, 17
  • [7] The quality of systematic reviews about interventions for refractive error can be improved: a review of systematic reviews
    Evan Mayo-Wilson
    Sueko Matsumura Ng
    Roy S. Chuck
    Tianjing Li
    [J]. BMC Ophthalmology, 17
  • [8] Seeing the forests and the trees-innovative approaches to exploring heterogeneity in systematic reviews of complex interventions to enhance health system decision-making: A protocol
    Ivers N.
    Tricco A.C.
    Trikalinos T.A.
    Dahabreh I.J.
    Danko K.J.
    Moher D.
    Straus S.E.
    Lavis J.N.
    Yu C.H.
    Shojania K.
    Manns B.
    Tonelli M.
    Ramsay T.
    Edwards A.
    Sargious P.
    Paprica A.
    Hillmer M.
    Grimshaw J.M.
    [J]. Systematic Reviews, 3 (1)
  • [9] Maximizing knowledge from systematic reviews of complex interventions
    Konnyu, Kristin J.
    Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
    Ivers, Noah M.
    Trikalinos, Thomas
    [J]. IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2023, 18
  • [10] Complex interventions and their implications for systematic reviews: A pragmatic approach
    Petticrew, Mark
    Anderson, Laurie
    Elder, Randy
    Grimshaw, Jeremy
    Hopkins, David
    Hahn, Robert
    Krause, Lauren
    Kristjansson, Elizabeth
    Mercer, Shawna
    Sipe, Teresa
    Tugwell, Peter
    Ueffing, Erin
    Waters, Elizabeth
    Welch, Vivian
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2015, 52 (07) : 1211 - 1216