The quality of systematic reviews and other synthesis in the time of COVID-19

Simple item page

Simple item page

Full item details

creativework.keywords - en
COVID-19*
Humans
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Research / standards
Research / trends*
Systematic Reviews as Topic / standards*
dc.contributor.author
Baumeister, A.
Abid, H.
Young, K. M.
Ayache, D.
Waddell, L.
Corrin, T.
dc.date.accessioned
2024-06-14T21:08:49Z
dc.date.available
2024-06-14T21:08:49Z
dc.date.issued
2021-08-03
dc.description - en
Here we evaluated how the need to rapidly produce syntheses has impacted the quality of the synthesis research. Thus, we sought to identify, evaluate and map the synthesis research on COVID-19 published up to 10 July 2020. A COVID-19 literature database was created using pre-specified COVID-19 search algorithms carried out in eight databases. We identified 863 citations considered to be synthesis research for evaluation in this project. Four-hundred and thirty-nine reviews were fully assessed with A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) and rated as very low-quality (n = 145), low-quality (n = 80), medium-quality (n = 208) and high-quality (n = 151). The quality of these reviews fell short of what is expected for synthesis research with key domains being left out of the typical methodology. The increase in risk of bias due to non-adherence to systematic review methodology is unknown and prevents the reader from assessing the validity of the review. The responsibility to assure the quality is held by both producers and publishers of synthesis research and our findings indicate there is a need to equip readers with the expertise to evaluate the review conduct before using it for decision-making purposes.
dc.description.abstract - en
COVID-19 research has been produced at an unprecedented rate and managing what is currently known is in part being accomplished through synthesis research. Here we evaluated how the need to rapidly produce syntheses has impacted the quality of the synthesis research. Thus, we sought to identify, evaluate and map the synthesis research on COVID-19 published up to 10 July 2020. A COVID-19 literature database was created using pre-specified COVID-19 search algorithms carried out in eight databases. We identified 863 citations considered to be synthesis research for evaluation in this project. Four-hundred and thirty-nine reviews were fully assessed with A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-2) and rated as very low-quality (n = 145), low-quality (n = 80), medium-quality (n = 208) and high-quality (n = 151). The quality of these reviews fell short of what is expected for synthesis research with key domains being left out of the typical methodology. The increase in risk of bias due to non-adherence to systematic review methodology is unknown and prevents the reader from assessing the validity of the review. The responsibility to assure the quality is held by both producers and publishers of synthesis research and our findings indicate there is a need to equip readers with the expertise to evaluate the review conduct before using it for decision-making purposes.
dc.identifier.doi
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268821001758
dc.identifier.issn
1469-4409
dc.identifier.pubmedID
34340726
dc.identifier.uri
https://open-science.canada.ca/handle/123456789/2606
dc.language.iso
en
dc.publisher
Cambridge University Press
dc.rights - en
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
dc.rights - fr
Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'utilisation commerciale - Pas de modification 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
dc.rights.openaccesslevel - en
Gold
dc.rights.openaccesslevel - fr
Or
dc.rights.uri - en
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.rights.uri - fr
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.fr
dc.subject - en
Health
dc.subject - fr
Santé
dc.subject.en - en
Health
dc.subject.fr - fr
Santé
dc.title - en
The quality of systematic reviews and other synthesis in the time of COVID-19
dc.type - en
Article
dc.type - fr
Article
local.article.journalissue
e182
local.article.journaltitle
Epidemiology & Infection
local.article.journalvolume
149
local.pagination
1-8
local.peerreview - en
Yes
local.peerreview - fr
Oui
Download(s)

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1

Thumbnail image

Name: baumeister-the-quality-of-systematic-reviews-and-other-synthesis.pdf

Size: 763.31 KB

Format: PDF

Download file

Page details

Date modified: