Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review

Abstract Background and objective The living systematic review (LSR) approach is based on ongoing surveillance of the literature and continual updating. Most currently available guidance documents address the conduct, reporting, publishing, and appraisal of systematic reviews (SRs), but are not suit...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Claire Iannizzi, Elie A. Akl, Eva Anslinger, Stephanie Weibel, Lara A. Kahale, Abina Mosunmola Aminat, Vanessa Piechotta, Nicole Skoetz
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2023-12-01
Series:Systematic Reviews
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02396-x
_version_ 1797388511941230592
author Claire Iannizzi
Elie A. Akl
Eva Anslinger
Stephanie Weibel
Lara A. Kahale
Abina Mosunmola Aminat
Vanessa Piechotta
Nicole Skoetz
author_facet Claire Iannizzi
Elie A. Akl
Eva Anslinger
Stephanie Weibel
Lara A. Kahale
Abina Mosunmola Aminat
Vanessa Piechotta
Nicole Skoetz
author_sort Claire Iannizzi
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background and objective The living systematic review (LSR) approach is based on ongoing surveillance of the literature and continual updating. Most currently available guidance documents address the conduct, reporting, publishing, and appraisal of systematic reviews (SRs), but are not suitable for LSRs per se and miss additional LSR-specific considerations. In this scoping review, we aim to systematically collate methodological guidance literature on how to conduct, report, publish, and appraise the quality of LSRs and identify current gaps in guidance. Methods A standard scoping review methodology was used. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), and The Cochrane Library on August 28, 2021. As for searching gray literature, we looked for existing guidelines and handbooks on LSRs from organizations that conduct evidence syntheses. The screening was conducted by two authors independently in Rayyan, and data extraction was done in duplicate using a pilot-tested data extraction form in Excel. Data was extracted according to four pre-defined categories for (i) conducting, (ii) reporting, (iii) publishing, and (iv) appraising LSRs. We mapped the findings by visualizing overview tables created in Microsoft Word. Results Of the 21 included papers, methodological guidance was found in 17 papers for conducting, in six papers for reporting, in 15 papers for publishing, and in two papers for appraising LSRs. Some of the identified key items for (i) conducting LSRs were identifying the rationale, screening tools, or re-revaluating inclusion criteria. Identified items of (ii) the original PRISMA checklist included reporting the registration and protocol, title, or synthesis methods. For (iii) publishing, there was guidance available on publication type and frequency or update trigger, and for (iv) appraising, guidance on the appropriate use of bias assessment or reporting funding of included studies was found. Our search revealed major evidence gaps, particularly for guidance on certain PRISMA items such as reporting results, discussion, support and funding, and availability of data and material of a LSR. Conclusion Important evidence gaps were identified for guidance on how to report in LSRs and appraise their quality. Our findings were applied to inform and prepare a PRISMA 2020 extension for LSR.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T22:41:53Z
format Article
id doaj.art-f135760814b24ab7b6b5e16418f9b2c3
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2046-4053
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T22:41:53Z
publishDate 2023-12-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Systematic Reviews
spelling doaj.art-f135760814b24ab7b6b5e16418f9b2c32023-12-17T12:08:16ZengBMCSystematic Reviews2046-40532023-12-0112111410.1186/s13643-023-02396-xMethods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping reviewClaire Iannizzi0Elie A. Akl1Eva Anslinger2Stephanie Weibel3Lara A. Kahale4Abina Mosunmola Aminat5Vanessa Piechotta6Nicole Skoetz7Institute of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of CologneDepartment of Medicine, American University of BeirutEvidence-Based Medicine, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of CologneDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine, University Hospital WürzburgEditorial and Methods Department, Cochrane Central Executive, CochraneRafic Hariri School of Nursing, American University of BeirutEvidence-Based Medicine, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Cologne, University of CologneInstitute of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of CologneAbstract Background and objective The living systematic review (LSR) approach is based on ongoing surveillance of the literature and continual updating. Most currently available guidance documents address the conduct, reporting, publishing, and appraisal of systematic reviews (SRs), but are not suitable for LSRs per se and miss additional LSR-specific considerations. In this scoping review, we aim to systematically collate methodological guidance literature on how to conduct, report, publish, and appraise the quality of LSRs and identify current gaps in guidance. Methods A standard scoping review methodology was used. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), and The Cochrane Library on August 28, 2021. As for searching gray literature, we looked for existing guidelines and handbooks on LSRs from organizations that conduct evidence syntheses. The screening was conducted by two authors independently in Rayyan, and data extraction was done in duplicate using a pilot-tested data extraction form in Excel. Data was extracted according to four pre-defined categories for (i) conducting, (ii) reporting, (iii) publishing, and (iv) appraising LSRs. We mapped the findings by visualizing overview tables created in Microsoft Word. Results Of the 21 included papers, methodological guidance was found in 17 papers for conducting, in six papers for reporting, in 15 papers for publishing, and in two papers for appraising LSRs. Some of the identified key items for (i) conducting LSRs were identifying the rationale, screening tools, or re-revaluating inclusion criteria. Identified items of (ii) the original PRISMA checklist included reporting the registration and protocol, title, or synthesis methods. For (iii) publishing, there was guidance available on publication type and frequency or update trigger, and for (iv) appraising, guidance on the appropriate use of bias assessment or reporting funding of included studies was found. Our search revealed major evidence gaps, particularly for guidance on certain PRISMA items such as reporting results, discussion, support and funding, and availability of data and material of a LSR. Conclusion Important evidence gaps were identified for guidance on how to report in LSRs and appraise their quality. Our findings were applied to inform and prepare a PRISMA 2020 extension for LSR.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02396-xLiving systematic reviewsMethods and guidanceScoping reviewConducting LSRsReportingAppraisal
spellingShingle Claire Iannizzi
Elie A. Akl
Eva Anslinger
Stephanie Weibel
Lara A. Kahale
Abina Mosunmola Aminat
Vanessa Piechotta
Nicole Skoetz
Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review
Systematic Reviews
Living systematic reviews
Methods and guidance
Scoping review
Conducting LSRs
Reporting
Appraisal
title Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review
title_full Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review
title_fullStr Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review
title_short Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review
title_sort methods and guidance on conducting reporting publishing and appraising living systematic reviews a scoping review
topic Living systematic reviews
Methods and guidance
Scoping review
Conducting LSRs
Reporting
Appraisal
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02396-x
work_keys_str_mv AT claireiannizzi methodsandguidanceonconductingreportingpublishingandappraisinglivingsystematicreviewsascopingreview
AT elieaakl methodsandguidanceonconductingreportingpublishingandappraisinglivingsystematicreviewsascopingreview
AT evaanslinger methodsandguidanceonconductingreportingpublishingandappraisinglivingsystematicreviewsascopingreview
AT stephanieweibel methodsandguidanceonconductingreportingpublishingandappraisinglivingsystematicreviewsascopingreview
AT laraakahale methodsandguidanceonconductingreportingpublishingandappraisinglivingsystematicreviewsascopingreview
AT abinamosunmolaaminat methodsandguidanceonconductingreportingpublishingandappraisinglivingsystematicreviewsascopingreview
AT vanessapiechotta methodsandguidanceonconductingreportingpublishingandappraisinglivingsystematicreviewsascopingreview
AT nicoleskoetz methodsandguidanceonconductingreportingpublishingandappraisinglivingsystematicreviewsascopingreview