Systematic reviews are rarely used to contextualise new results-a systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies

被引:7
|
作者
Draborg, Eva [1 ]
Andreasen, Jane [2 ,3 ]
Norgaard, Birgitte [1 ]
Juhl, Carsten Bogh [4 ,5 ,6 ,7 ]
Yost, Jennifer [8 ]
Brunnhuber, Klara [9 ]
Robinson, Karen A. [10 ]
Lund, Hans [11 ]
机构
[1] Univ Southern Denmark, Dept Publ Hlth, Odense, Denmark
[2] Aalborg Univ Hosp, Dept Physiotherapy & Occupat Therapy, Aalborg, Denmark
[3] Aalborg Univ, Publ Hlth & Epidemiol Grp, Dept Hlth Sci & Technol, Aalborg, Denmark
[4] Univ Southern Denmark, Dept Sports Sci & Clin Biomech, Herlev, Denmark
[5] Copenhagen Univ Hosp, Dept Physiotherapy & Occupat Therapy, Herlev, Denmark
[6] Univ Southern Denmark, Dept Sports Sci & Clin Biomech, Gentofte, Denmark
[7] Copenhagen Univ Hosp, Dept Physiotherapy & Occupat Therapy, Gentofte, Denmark
[8] Villanova Univ, M Louise Fitzpatrick Coll Nursing, Villanova, PA 19085 USA
[9] Elsevier, Digital Content Serv, London, England
[10] Johns Hopkins Univ, Sch Med, Baltimore, MD USA
[11] Western Norway Univ Appl Sci, Sect Evidence Based Practice, Bergen, Norway
关键词
Systematic review; Evidence-based research; Context; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIALS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; RELEVANT EVIDENCE; PUTTING RESEARCH; SECTIONS; CITATION; QUALITY; WASTE; BEGIN; END;
D O I
10.1186/s13643-022-02062-8
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Results of new studies should be interpreted in the context of what is already known to compare results and build the state of the science. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify and synthesise results from meta-research studies examining if original studies within health use systematic reviews to place their results in the context of earlier, similar studies. Methods: We searched MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE (OVID), and the Cochrane Methodology: Register for meta-research studies reporting the use of systematic reviews to place results of original clinical studies in the context of existing studies. The primary outcome was the percentage of original studies included in the meta-research studies using systematic reviews or meta-analyses placing new results in the context of existing studies. Two reviewers independently performed screening and data extraction. Data were synthesised using narrative synthesis and a random-effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate the mean proportion of original studies placing their results in the context of earlier studies. The protocol was registered in Open Science Framework. Results: We included 15 meta-research studies, representing 1724 original studies. The mean percentage of original studies within these meta-research studies placing their results in the context of existing studies was 30.7% (95% CI [23.8%, 37.6%], I-2=87.4%). Only one of the meta-research studies integrated results in a meta-analysis, while four integrated their results within a systematic review; the remaining cited or referred to a systematic review. The results of this systematic review are characterised by a high degree of heterogeneity and should be interpreted cautiously. Conclusion: Our systematic review demonstrates a low rate of and great variability in using systematic reviews to place new results in the context of existing studies. On average, one third of the original studies contextualised their results. Improvement is still needed in researchers' use of prior research systematically and transparently-also known as the use of an evidence-based research approach, to contribute to the accumulation of new evidence on which future studies should be based.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Systematic reviews are rarely used to contextualise new results—a systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies
    Eva Draborg
    Jane Andreasen
    Birgitte Nørgaard
    Carsten Bogh Juhl
    Jennifer Yost
    Klara Brunnhuber
    Karen A. Robinson
    Hans Lund
    [J]. Systematic Reviews, 11
  • [2] Systematic reviews are rarely used to inform study design- a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Norgaard, Birgitte
    Draborg, Eva
    Andreasen, Jane
    Juhl, Carsten Bogh
    Yost, Jennifer
    Brunnhuber, Klara
    Robinson, Karen A.
    Lund, Hans
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2022, 145 : 1 - 13
  • [3] Justification of research using systematic reviews continues to be inconsistent in clinical health science-A systematic review and meta-analysis of meta-research studies
    Andreasen, Jane
    Norgaard, Birgitte
    Draborg, Eva
    Juhl, Carsten Bogh
    Yost, Jennifer
    Brunnhuber, Klara
    Robinson, Karen A.
    Lund, Hans
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2022, 17 (10):
  • [4] Systematic reviews and meta-analysis - Studies of studies
    Engberg, Sandra
    [J]. JOURNAL OF WOUND OSTOMY AND CONTINENCE NURSING, 2008, 35 (03) : 258 - 265
  • [5] Meta-research evaluating redundancy and use of systematic reviews when planning new studies in health research: a scoping review
    Lund, Hans
    Robinson, Karen A.
    Gjerland, Ane
    Nykvist, Hanna
    Drachen, Thea Marie
    Christensen, Robin
    Juhl, Carsten Bogh
    Jamtvedt, Gro
    Nortvedt, Monica
    Bjerrum, Merete
    Westmore, Matt
    Yost, Jennifer
    Brunnhuber, Klara
    Network, Evidence-Based Research
    [J]. SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2022, 11 (01)
  • [6] Meta-research evaluating redundancy and use of systematic reviews when planning new studies in health research: a scoping review
    Hans Lund
    Karen A. Robinson
    Ane Gjerland
    Hanna Nykvist
    Thea Marie Drachen
    Robin Christensen
    Carsten Bogh Juhl
    Gro Jamtvedt
    Monica Nortvedt
    Merete Bjerrum
    Matt Westmore
    Jennifer Yost
    Klara Brunnhuber
    [J]. Systematic Reviews, 11
  • [7] Research synthesis: systematic reviews and meta-analysis
    Moncrieff, J
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF PSYCHIATRY, 1998, 10 (04) : 304 - 311
  • [8] Systematic reviews and meta-analysis in nutrition research
    Kelley, George A.
    Kelley, Kristi S.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION, 2019, 122 (11) : 1279 - 1294
  • [9] Changing patterns in reporting and sharing of review data in systematic reviews with meta-analysis of the effects of interventions: cross sectional meta-research study
    Phi-Yen Nguyen
    Kanukula, Raju
    McKenzie, Joanne E.
    Alqaidoom, Zainab
    Brennan, Sue E.
    Haddaway, Neal R.
    Hamilton, Daniel G.
    Karunananthan, Sathya
    McDonald, Steve
    Moher, David
    Nakagawa, Shinichi
    Nunan, David
    Tugwell, Peter
    Welch, Vivian A.
    Page, Matthew J.
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2022, 379
  • [10] Systematic reviews and meta-analysis
    Lewis, G
    Churchill, R
    Hotopf, M
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE, 1997, 27 (01) : 3 - 7