Systematic and other reviews: criteria and complexities

Electronic search strategy (with a full description of at least one electronic search strategy sufficient to allow replication of the search), process for article selection, data variables sought, assumptions and simplifications, methods for assessing bias risk of each individual study (such as sele...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of otolaryngology 2021-07, Vol.50 (1), p.1-41, Article 41
Hauptverfasser: Sataloff, Robert T., Bush, Matthew L., Chandra, Rakesh, Chepeha, Douglas, Rotenberg, Brian, Fisher, Edward W., Goldenberg, David, Hanna, Ehab Y., Kerschner, Joseph E., Kraus, Dennis H., Krouse, John H., Li, Daqing, Link, Michael, Lustig, Lawrence R., Selesnick, Samuel H., Sindwani, Raj, Smith, Richard J., Tysome, James, Weber, Peter C., Welling, D. Bradley
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Electronic search strategy (with a full description of at least one electronic search strategy sufficient to allow replication of the search), process for article selection, data variables sought, assumptions and simplifications, methods for assessing bias risk of each individual study (such as selective reporting in individual studies) and utilization of this information in data synthesis, principal summary measures (risk ratio, hazard ratio, difference in means, etc.), methods of data management and combining study results, outcome level assessment, and other information should be reported. If the systematic review involves studies with paired samples and quantitative data, a summary of data should be provided for each intervention group along with effect estimates and confidence intervals for all outcomes of each study. If a meta-analysis is performed, then synthesized effect size should be reported with confidence intervals and measures of consistency (i.e. – data heterogeneity such as I2) for each meta-analysis, and assessment of bias risk across studies. Studies that lack a control group may over-estimate the effect size of the experimental intervention or condition being studied and are not ideal for meta-analyses [8].
ISSN:1916-0216
1916-0208
1916-0216
DOI:10.1186/s40463-021-00527-9