Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | São Paulo medical journal (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802015000300206 |
Resumo: | CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Overviews of Systematic Reviews (OoRs) are a new type of study in which multiple evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) is compiled into an accessible and useful document. The aim here was to describe the state of the art and critically assess Cochrane OoRs that have been published.DESIGN AND SETTING: Descriptive study conducted at a research center.METHODS: The OoRs identified through the filter developed in Part I of this study were evaluated in five domains: methodological quality; quality of evidence; implications for practice; general profile of OoRs; and length of work.RESULTS: All 13 OoRs included had high methodological quality. Some OoRs did not present sufficient data to judge the quality of evidence; using sensitivity analysis, the quality of evidence of the OoRs increased. Regarding implications for practice, 64% of the interventions were judged as beneficial or harmful, while 36% of them showed insufficient evidence for judgment. It is expected (with 95% confidence interval) that one OoR will include 9,462 to 64,469 patients, 9 to 29 systematic reviews and 80 to 344 primary studies, and assess 6 to 21 interventions; and that 50 to 92% of OoRs will produce meta-analysis. The OoRs generated 2 to 26 meta-analyses over a period of 18 to 31 months.CONCLUSION: The OoRs presented high methodological quality; the quality of evidence tended to be moderate/high; most interventions were judged to be beneficial/harmful; the mean length of work was 24 months. The OoR profile adds power to decision-making. |
id |
APM-1_ff6623b0d77f5add8a6b460b94a1a21c |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S1516-31802015000300206 |
network_acronym_str |
APM-1 |
network_name_str |
São Paulo medical journal (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part IIReview [publication type]Study characteristics [publication type]Decision makingEvidence-based practiceEvidence-based medicineCONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Overviews of Systematic Reviews (OoRs) are a new type of study in which multiple evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) is compiled into an accessible and useful document. The aim here was to describe the state of the art and critically assess Cochrane OoRs that have been published.DESIGN AND SETTING: Descriptive study conducted at a research center.METHODS: The OoRs identified through the filter developed in Part I of this study were evaluated in five domains: methodological quality; quality of evidence; implications for practice; general profile of OoRs; and length of work.RESULTS: All 13 OoRs included had high methodological quality. Some OoRs did not present sufficient data to judge the quality of evidence; using sensitivity analysis, the quality of evidence of the OoRs increased. Regarding implications for practice, 64% of the interventions were judged as beneficial or harmful, while 36% of them showed insufficient evidence for judgment. It is expected (with 95% confidence interval) that one OoR will include 9,462 to 64,469 patients, 9 to 29 systematic reviews and 80 to 344 primary studies, and assess 6 to 21 interventions; and that 50 to 92% of OoRs will produce meta-analysis. The OoRs generated 2 to 26 meta-analyses over a period of 18 to 31 months.CONCLUSION: The OoRs presented high methodological quality; the quality of evidence tended to be moderate/high; most interventions were judged to be beneficial/harmful; the mean length of work was 24 months. The OoR profile adds power to decision-making.Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM2015-06-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802015000300206Sao Paulo Medical Journal v.133 n.3 2015reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online)instname:Associação Paulista de Medicinainstacron:APM10.1590/1516-3180.2013.8150015info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSilva,ValterGrande,Antonio JoseCarvalho,Alan Pedrosa Viegas deMartimbianco,Ana Luiza CabreraRiera,Racheleng2015-09-29T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1516-31802015000300206Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/spmjhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevistas@apm.org.br1806-94601516-3180opendoar:2015-09-29T00:00São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicinafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II |
title |
Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II |
spellingShingle |
Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II Silva,Valter Review [publication type] Study characteristics [publication type] Decision making Evidence-based practice Evidence-based medicine |
title_short |
Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II |
title_full |
Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II |
title_fullStr |
Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II |
title_full_unstemmed |
Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II |
title_sort |
Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study. Part II |
author |
Silva,Valter |
author_facet |
Silva,Valter Grande,Antonio Jose Carvalho,Alan Pedrosa Viegas de Martimbianco,Ana Luiza Cabrera Riera,Rachel |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Grande,Antonio Jose Carvalho,Alan Pedrosa Viegas de Martimbianco,Ana Luiza Cabrera Riera,Rachel |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Silva,Valter Grande,Antonio Jose Carvalho,Alan Pedrosa Viegas de Martimbianco,Ana Luiza Cabrera Riera,Rachel |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Review [publication type] Study characteristics [publication type] Decision making Evidence-based practice Evidence-based medicine |
topic |
Review [publication type] Study characteristics [publication type] Decision making Evidence-based practice Evidence-based medicine |
description |
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Overviews of Systematic Reviews (OoRs) are a new type of study in which multiple evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) is compiled into an accessible and useful document. The aim here was to describe the state of the art and critically assess Cochrane OoRs that have been published.DESIGN AND SETTING: Descriptive study conducted at a research center.METHODS: The OoRs identified through the filter developed in Part I of this study were evaluated in five domains: methodological quality; quality of evidence; implications for practice; general profile of OoRs; and length of work.RESULTS: All 13 OoRs included had high methodological quality. Some OoRs did not present sufficient data to judge the quality of evidence; using sensitivity analysis, the quality of evidence of the OoRs increased. Regarding implications for practice, 64% of the interventions were judged as beneficial or harmful, while 36% of them showed insufficient evidence for judgment. It is expected (with 95% confidence interval) that one OoR will include 9,462 to 64,469 patients, 9 to 29 systematic reviews and 80 to 344 primary studies, and assess 6 to 21 interventions; and that 50 to 92% of OoRs will produce meta-analysis. The OoRs generated 2 to 26 meta-analyses over a period of 18 to 31 months.CONCLUSION: The OoRs presented high methodological quality; the quality of evidence tended to be moderate/high; most interventions were judged to be beneficial/harmful; the mean length of work was 24 months. The OoR profile adds power to decision-making. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-06-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802015000300206 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-31802015000300206 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/1516-3180.2013.8150015 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Sao Paulo Medical Journal v.133 n.3 2015 reponame:São Paulo medical journal (Online) instname:Associação Paulista de Medicina instacron:APM |
instname_str |
Associação Paulista de Medicina |
instacron_str |
APM |
institution |
APM |
reponame_str |
São Paulo medical journal (Online) |
collection |
São Paulo medical journal (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
São Paulo medical journal (Online) - Associação Paulista de Medicina |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revistas@apm.org.br |
_version_ |
1754209264370450432 |