Guidance for overviews of reviews continues to accumulate, but important challenges remain: a scoping review
Abstract Background Overviews of reviews (overviews) provide an invaluable resource for healthcare decision-making by combining large volumes of systematic review (SR) data into a single synthesis. The production of high-quality overviews hinges on the availability of practical evidence-based guidan...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2020-11-01
|
| Series: | Systematic Reviews |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13643-020-01509-0 |
| _version_ | 1811294559555026944 |
|---|---|
| author | Michelle Gates Allison Gates Samantha Guitard Michelle Pollock Lisa Hartling |
| author_facet | Michelle Gates Allison Gates Samantha Guitard Michelle Pollock Lisa Hartling |
| author_sort | Michelle Gates |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Overviews of reviews (overviews) provide an invaluable resource for healthcare decision-making by combining large volumes of systematic review (SR) data into a single synthesis. The production of high-quality overviews hinges on the availability of practical evidence-based guidance for conduct and reporting. Objectives Within the broad purpose of informing the development of a reporting guideline for overviews, we aimed to provide an up-to-date map of existing guidance related to the conduct of overviews, and to identify common challenges that authors face when undertaking overviews. Methods We updated a scoping review published in 2016 using the search methods that had produced the highest yield: ongoing reference tracking (2014 to March 2020 in PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar), hand-searching conference proceedings and websites, and contacting authors of published overviews. Using a qualitative meta-summary approach, one reviewer extracted, organized, and summarized the guidance and challenges presented within the included documents. A second reviewer verified the data and synthesis. Results We located 28 new guidance documents, for a total of 77 documents produced by 34 research groups. The new guidance helps to resolve some earlier identified challenges in the production of overviews. Important developments include strengthened guidance on handling primary study overlap at the study selection and analysis stages. Despite marked progress, several areas continue to be hampered by inconsistent or lacking guidance. There is ongoing debate about whether, when, and how supplemental primary studies should be included in overviews. Guidance remains scant on how to extract and use appraisals of quality of the primary studies within the included SRs and how to adapt GRADE methodology to overviews. The challenges that overview authors face are often related to the above-described steps in the process where evidence-based guidance is lacking or conflicting. Conclusion The rising popularity of overviews has been accompanied by a steady accumulation of new, and sometimes conflicting, guidance. While recent guidance has helped to address some of the challenges that overview authors face, areas of uncertainty remain. Practical tools supported by empirical evidence are needed to assist authors with the many methodological decision points that are encountered in the production of overviews. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T05:19:19Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-7928b73eb2824489a77c7214628800a0 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2046-4053 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T05:19:19Z |
| publishDate | 2020-11-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Systematic Reviews |
| spelling | doaj.art-7928b73eb2824489a77c7214628800a02022-12-22T03:00:48ZengBMCSystematic Reviews2046-40532020-11-019111910.1186/s13643-020-01509-0Guidance for overviews of reviews continues to accumulate, but important challenges remain: a scoping reviewMichelle Gates0Allison Gates1Samantha Guitard2Michelle Pollock3Lisa Hartling4Alberta Research Centre for Health Evidence, Department of Pediatrics, University of AlbertaAlberta Research Centre for Health Evidence, Department of Pediatrics, University of AlbertaAlberta Research Centre for Health Evidence, Department of Pediatrics, University of AlbertaHealth Technology Assessment Unit, Institute of Health EconomicsAlberta Research Centre for Health Evidence, Department of Pediatrics, University of AlbertaAbstract Background Overviews of reviews (overviews) provide an invaluable resource for healthcare decision-making by combining large volumes of systematic review (SR) data into a single synthesis. The production of high-quality overviews hinges on the availability of practical evidence-based guidance for conduct and reporting. Objectives Within the broad purpose of informing the development of a reporting guideline for overviews, we aimed to provide an up-to-date map of existing guidance related to the conduct of overviews, and to identify common challenges that authors face when undertaking overviews. Methods We updated a scoping review published in 2016 using the search methods that had produced the highest yield: ongoing reference tracking (2014 to March 2020 in PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar), hand-searching conference proceedings and websites, and contacting authors of published overviews. Using a qualitative meta-summary approach, one reviewer extracted, organized, and summarized the guidance and challenges presented within the included documents. A second reviewer verified the data and synthesis. Results We located 28 new guidance documents, for a total of 77 documents produced by 34 research groups. The new guidance helps to resolve some earlier identified challenges in the production of overviews. Important developments include strengthened guidance on handling primary study overlap at the study selection and analysis stages. Despite marked progress, several areas continue to be hampered by inconsistent or lacking guidance. There is ongoing debate about whether, when, and how supplemental primary studies should be included in overviews. Guidance remains scant on how to extract and use appraisals of quality of the primary studies within the included SRs and how to adapt GRADE methodology to overviews. The challenges that overview authors face are often related to the above-described steps in the process where evidence-based guidance is lacking or conflicting. Conclusion The rising popularity of overviews has been accompanied by a steady accumulation of new, and sometimes conflicting, guidance. While recent guidance has helped to address some of the challenges that overview authors face, areas of uncertainty remain. Practical tools supported by empirical evidence are needed to assist authors with the many methodological decision points that are encountered in the production of overviews.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13643-020-01509-0Overview of reviewsUmbrella reviewMetareviewSystematic reviewsKnowledge synthesisEvidence synthesis |
| spellingShingle | Michelle Gates Allison Gates Samantha Guitard Michelle Pollock Lisa Hartling Guidance for overviews of reviews continues to accumulate, but important challenges remain: a scoping review Systematic Reviews Overview of reviews Umbrella review Metareview Systematic reviews Knowledge synthesis Evidence synthesis |
| title | Guidance for overviews of reviews continues to accumulate, but important challenges remain: a scoping review |
| title_full | Guidance for overviews of reviews continues to accumulate, but important challenges remain: a scoping review |
| title_fullStr | Guidance for overviews of reviews continues to accumulate, but important challenges remain: a scoping review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Guidance for overviews of reviews continues to accumulate, but important challenges remain: a scoping review |
| title_short | Guidance for overviews of reviews continues to accumulate, but important challenges remain: a scoping review |
| title_sort | guidance for overviews of reviews continues to accumulate but important challenges remain a scoping review |
| topic | Overview of reviews Umbrella review Metareview Systematic reviews Knowledge synthesis Evidence synthesis |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13643-020-01509-0 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT michellegates guidanceforoverviewsofreviewscontinuestoaccumulatebutimportantchallengesremainascopingreview AT allisongates guidanceforoverviewsofreviewscontinuestoaccumulatebutimportantchallengesremainascopingreview AT samanthaguitard guidanceforoverviewsofreviewscontinuestoaccumulatebutimportantchallengesremainascopingreview AT michellepollock guidanceforoverviewsofreviewscontinuestoaccumulatebutimportantchallengesremainascopingreview AT lisahartling guidanceforoverviewsofreviewscontinuestoaccumulatebutimportantchallengesremainascopingreview |