Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study
Abstract Background Systematic reviews should specify all outcomes at the protocol stage. Pre-specification helps prevent outcome choice from being influenced by knowledge of included study results. Completely specified outcomes comprise five elements: (1) domain (title), (2) specific measurement (t...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2020-01-01
|
| Series: | Systematic Reviews |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1268-1 |
| _version_ | 1819330533949177856 |
|---|---|
| author | Solange Durão Marianne Visser Tamara Kredo Ian J. Saldanha |
| author_facet | Solange Durão Marianne Visser Tamara Kredo Ian J. Saldanha |
| author_sort | Solange Durão |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Systematic reviews should specify all outcomes at the protocol stage. Pre-specification helps prevent outcome choice from being influenced by knowledge of included study results. Completely specified outcomes comprise five elements: (1) domain (title), (2) specific measurement (technique/instrument), (3) specific metric (data format for analysis), (4) method of aggregation (how group data are summarised), and (5) time points. This study aims to assess the completeness of outcome pre-specification in systematic reviews of interventions to improve food security, specifically food availability, in low- and middle-income countries, as well as to assess the comparability of outcome elements across reviews reporting the same outcome domains. Methods We will examine systematic reviews from an ongoing overview of systematic reviews, which assessed the effects of interventions addressing food insecurity through improving food production, access, or utilisation compared with no intervention or a different intervention, on nutrition outcomes. We will examine the original protocols; if unavailable, we will examine the “Methods” section of the systematic reviews’ most recent version. One investigator will identify and group all outcome domains that the authors of the included protocols intended to measure in the systematic review and a second investigator will verify the domains. For outcome domains reported in at least 25% of protocols, one author will extract data using a pre-specified form and a second author will verify the data. We will use descriptive statistics to report the number, types, and degree of specification of outcomes in included protocols. We will assess the extent of completeness of outcome pre-specification based on the number of outcome elements (out of five). We will assess comparability of outcome domains through examining how individual elements are described across SRs reporting the same outcome domains. Discussion Our findings will contribute to understanding about the best approach to pre-specify outcomes for systematic reviews and primary research in the field of food security. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-24T14:00:03Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-4f3137724eec41a7bf8ceadad2c89c70 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2046-4053 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-24T14:00:03Z |
| publishDate | 2020-01-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Systematic Reviews |
| spelling | doaj.art-4f3137724eec41a7bf8ceadad2c89c702022-12-21T16:52:29ZengBMCSystematic Reviews2046-40532020-01-01911510.1186/s13643-019-1268-1Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological studySolange Durão0Marianne Visser1Tamara Kredo2Ian J. Saldanha3Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research CouncilCentre for Evidence-based Health Care, Department of Interdisciplinary Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch UniversityCochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research CouncilCenter for Evidence Synthesis in Health, Department of Health Services, Policy and Practice (Primary) and Department of Epidemiology (Secondary), Brown University School of Public HealthAbstract Background Systematic reviews should specify all outcomes at the protocol stage. Pre-specification helps prevent outcome choice from being influenced by knowledge of included study results. Completely specified outcomes comprise five elements: (1) domain (title), (2) specific measurement (technique/instrument), (3) specific metric (data format for analysis), (4) method of aggregation (how group data are summarised), and (5) time points. This study aims to assess the completeness of outcome pre-specification in systematic reviews of interventions to improve food security, specifically food availability, in low- and middle-income countries, as well as to assess the comparability of outcome elements across reviews reporting the same outcome domains. Methods We will examine systematic reviews from an ongoing overview of systematic reviews, which assessed the effects of interventions addressing food insecurity through improving food production, access, or utilisation compared with no intervention or a different intervention, on nutrition outcomes. We will examine the original protocols; if unavailable, we will examine the “Methods” section of the systematic reviews’ most recent version. One investigator will identify and group all outcome domains that the authors of the included protocols intended to measure in the systematic review and a second investigator will verify the domains. For outcome domains reported in at least 25% of protocols, one author will extract data using a pre-specified form and a second author will verify the data. We will use descriptive statistics to report the number, types, and degree of specification of outcomes in included protocols. We will assess the extent of completeness of outcome pre-specification based on the number of outcome elements (out of five). We will assess comparability of outcome domains through examining how individual elements are described across SRs reporting the same outcome domains. Discussion Our findings will contribute to understanding about the best approach to pre-specify outcomes for systematic reviews and primary research in the field of food security.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1268-1Outcome pre-specificationOutcomes reporting biasSystematic review methodsFood security |
| spellingShingle | Solange Durão Marianne Visser Tamara Kredo Ian J. Saldanha Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study Systematic Reviews Outcome pre-specification Outcomes reporting bias Systematic review methods Food security |
| title | Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study |
| title_full | Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study |
| title_fullStr | Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study |
| title_short | Assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security: protocol for a methodological study |
| title_sort | assessing the completeness and comparability of outcomes in systematic reviews addressing food security protocol for a methodological study |
| topic | Outcome pre-specification Outcomes reporting bias Systematic review methods Food security |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1268-1 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT solangedurao assessingthecompletenessandcomparabilityofoutcomesinsystematicreviewsaddressingfoodsecurityprotocolforamethodologicalstudy AT mariannevisser assessingthecompletenessandcomparabilityofoutcomesinsystematicreviewsaddressingfoodsecurityprotocolforamethodologicalstudy AT tamarakredo assessingthecompletenessandcomparabilityofoutcomesinsystematicreviewsaddressingfoodsecurityprotocolforamethodologicalstudy AT ianjsaldanha assessingthecompletenessandcomparabilityofoutcomesinsystematicreviewsaddressingfoodsecurityprotocolforamethodologicalstudy |