Experience report of two living systematic Cochrane reviews on COVID-19

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.zefq.2023.11.004
Carina Wagner , Caroline Hirsch , Waldemar Siemens , Philipp Kapp , Claire Iannizzi
{"title":"Experience report of two living systematic Cochrane reviews on COVID-19","authors":"Carina Wagner ,&nbsp;Caroline Hirsch ,&nbsp;Waldemar Siemens ,&nbsp;Philipp Kapp ,&nbsp;Claire Iannizzi","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2023.11.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Up-to-date systematic reviews (SRs) are essential for making evidence-based decisions. During the 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, there was a particular need for up-to-date evidence, making the living systematic review (LSR) approach an appropriate review type. However, this approach poses certain challenges.</p></div><div><h3>Objective and outline</h3><p>We aim to provide practice insights and report challenges that we faced while conducting two Cochrane LSRs on COVID-19 treatments with (i) convalescent plasma and (ii) systemic corticosteroids. We address our objective with an experience report and share challenges of the following components based on Iannizzi et al. (2022): study design, publication types, intervention/comparator, outcomes, search strategy, review updates and transparent reporting of differences between review updates.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Regarding the study design, the plasma LSR included different study designs because RCT data were not available at the beginning of the pandemic, whereas for the corticosteroids LSR, which started several months later, RCT data were already available. The challenges in both LSRs included the publication types (preprints were included with caution) and the intervention/comparator, for instance the unavailability of standard of care for either LSR, or SARS-CoV-2 variants occurrence. Further challenges in both LSRs occurred in the components “outcome sets” (which had to be adjusted) and “literature search”. The decision criteria for updating were based on important studies and available resources in both LSRs and policy relevance in the plasma LSR. Transparent reporting of the differences between the various update versions were discussed for both LSRs.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion and conclusion</h3><p>In summary, there are similarities and differences regarding challenges of review components for both LSRs. It is important to keep in mind that the two LSR examples presented here were conducted in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, many of the challenges are attributable to the pandemic and are not specific to LSRs, such as constant adjustments of the outcome sets or changes in the database search. Nevertheless, we believe that some of these aspects are helpful for LSR authors and are applicable to other LSRs outside the pandemic context, particularly in areas where new evidence is rapidly emerging.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1865921723002155/pdfft?md5=d0cb5188bf67631dd68f5bcd2f51d75d&pid=1-s2.0-S1865921723002155-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1865921723002155","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Up-to-date systematic reviews (SRs) are essential for making evidence-based decisions. During the 2019 coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, there was a particular need for up-to-date evidence, making the living systematic review (LSR) approach an appropriate review type. However, this approach poses certain challenges.

Objective and outline

We aim to provide practice insights and report challenges that we faced while conducting two Cochrane LSRs on COVID-19 treatments with (i) convalescent plasma and (ii) systemic corticosteroids. We address our objective with an experience report and share challenges of the following components based on Iannizzi et al. (2022): study design, publication types, intervention/comparator, outcomes, search strategy, review updates and transparent reporting of differences between review updates.

Results

Regarding the study design, the plasma LSR included different study designs because RCT data were not available at the beginning of the pandemic, whereas for the corticosteroids LSR, which started several months later, RCT data were already available. The challenges in both LSRs included the publication types (preprints were included with caution) and the intervention/comparator, for instance the unavailability of standard of care for either LSR, or SARS-CoV-2 variants occurrence. Further challenges in both LSRs occurred in the components “outcome sets” (which had to be adjusted) and “literature search”. The decision criteria for updating were based on important studies and available resources in both LSRs and policy relevance in the plasma LSR. Transparent reporting of the differences between the various update versions were discussed for both LSRs.

Discussion and conclusion

In summary, there are similarities and differences regarding challenges of review components for both LSRs. It is important to keep in mind that the two LSR examples presented here were conducted in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, many of the challenges are attributable to the pandemic and are not specific to LSRs, such as constant adjustments of the outcome sets or changes in the database search. Nevertheless, we believe that some of these aspects are helpful for LSR authors and are applicable to other LSRs outside the pandemic context, particularly in areas where new evidence is rapidly emerging.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于 COVID-19 的两次系统性 Cochrane 审查的经验报告。
导言:最新的系统综述(SR)对于做出循证决策至关重要。在 2019 年冠状病毒(COVID-19)大流行期间,尤其需要最新的证据,因此活系统综述(LSR)方法成为一种合适的综述类型。然而,这种方法也带来了一定的挑战:我们旨在提供实践见解,并报告我们在对 COVID-19 的治疗方法(i)康复血浆和(ii)系统性皮质类固醇进行两项 Cochrane LSR 时所面临的挑战。我们根据 Iannizzi 等人(2022 年)的研究设计、出版物类型、干预/比较者、结果、检索策略、综述更新以及透明报告综述更新之间的差异,通过经验报告来实现我们的目标,并分享以下组成部分所面临的挑战:关于研究设计,血浆LSR包括不同的研究设计,因为在大流行开始时还没有RCT数据,而皮质类固醇LSR在几个月后开始,已经有了RCT数据。这两项LSR所面临的挑战包括出版物类型(谨慎纳入预印本)和干预/比较对象,例如,LSR或SARS-CoV-2变异体发生时无法获得标准护理。两次整 体研究的进一步挑战出现在 "结果集"(必须进行调整)和 "文献检索 "两个部分。更新的决定标准是基于两项整 体研究中的重要研究和可用资源,以及血浆整体研究中的政策相关性。讨论和结论:总之,两份通函的审查内容既有相似之处,也有不同之处。重要的是要记住,这里介绍的两个 LSR 案例都是在 COVID-19 大流行之后进行的。因此,许多挑战是由大流行引起的,并不是 LSR 所特有的,如结果集的不断调整或数据库搜索的变化。尽管如此,我们认为其中一些方面对LSR作者很有帮助,也适用于大流行背景之外的其他LSR,尤其是在新证据迅速出现的领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Intentions to move abroad among medical students: a cross-sectional study to investigate determinants and opinions. Analysis of Medical Rehabilitation Needs of 2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquake Victims: Adıyaman Example. Efficacy of whole body vibration on fascicle length and joint angle in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. The change process questionnaire (CPQ): A psychometric validation. Psychosexual dysfunction in male patients with cannabis dependence and synthetic cannabinoid dependence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1