View in EDS

Checklists of Methodological Issues for Review Authors to Consider When Including Non-Randomized Studies in Systematic Reviews

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Checklists of Methodological Issues for Review Authors to Consider When Including Non-Randomized Studies in Systematic Reviews
Language: English
Authors: Wells, George A., Shea, Beverley, Higgins, Julian P. T.
Source: Research Synthesis Methods. Mar 2013 4(1):63-77.
Availability: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 15
Publication Date: 2013
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Health Services, Intervention, Workshops, Research Methodology, Meta Analysis, Research Problems, Check Lists, Risk, Guidelines, Evidence
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1077
ISSN: 1759-2879
Abstract: Background: There is increasing interest from review authors about including non-randomized studies (NRS) in their systematic reviews of health care interventions. This series from the Ottawa Non-Randomized Studies Workshop consists of six papers identifying methodological issues when doing this. Aim: To format the guidance from the preceding papers on study design and bias, confounding and meta-analysis, selective reporting, and applicability/directness into checklists of issues for review authors to consider when including NRS in a systematic review. Checklists: Checklists were devised providing frameworks to describe/assess: (1) study designs based on study design features; (2) risk of residual confounding and when to consider meta-analysing data from NRS; (3) risk of selective reporting based on the Cochrane framework for detecting selective outcome reporting in trials but extended to selective reporting of analyses; and (4) directness of evidence contributed by a study to aid integration of NRS findings into summary of findings tables. Summary: The checklists described will allow review groups to operationalize the inclusion of NRS in systematic reviews in a more consistent way. The next major step is extending the existing Cochrane Risk of Bias tool so that it can assess the risk of bias to NRS included in a review.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2016
Accession Number: EJ1109010
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1109010
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Checklists of Methodological Issues for Review Authors to Consider When Including Non-Randomized Studies in Systematic Reviews
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wells%2C+George+A%2E%22">Wells, George A.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Shea%2C+Beverley%22">Shea, Beverley</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Higgins%2C+Julian+P%2E+T%2E%22">Higgins, Julian P. T.</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Research+Synthesis+Methods%22"><i>Research Synthesis Methods</i></searchLink>. Mar 2013 4(1):63-77.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 15
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2013
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Health+Services%22">Health Services</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intervention%22">Intervention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Workshops%22">Workshops</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+Methodology%22">Research Methodology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Meta+Analysis%22">Meta Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+Problems%22">Research Problems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Check+Lists%22">Check Lists</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Risk%22">Risk</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Guidelines%22">Guidelines</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evidence%22">Evidence</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1002/jrsm.1077
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1759-2879
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Background: There is increasing interest from review authors about including non-randomized studies (NRS) in their systematic reviews of health care interventions. This series from the Ottawa Non-Randomized Studies Workshop consists of six papers identifying methodological issues when doing this. Aim: To format the guidance from the preceding papers on study design and bias, confounding and meta-analysis, selective reporting, and applicability/directness into checklists of issues for review authors to consider when including NRS in a systematic review. Checklists: Checklists were devised providing frameworks to describe/assess: (1) study designs based on study design features; (2) risk of residual confounding and when to consider meta-analysing data from NRS; (3) risk of selective reporting based on the Cochrane framework for detecting selective outcome reporting in trials but extended to selective reporting of analyses; and (4) directness of evidence contributed by a study to aid integration of NRS findings into summary of findings tables. Summary: The checklists described will allow review groups to operationalize the inclusion of NRS in systematic reviews in a more consistent way. The next major step is extending the existing Cochrane Risk of Bias tool so that it can assess the risk of bias to NRS included in a review.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2016
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1109010
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1109010
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/jrsm.1077
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 15
        StartPage: 63
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Health Services
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Intervention
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Workshops
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research Methodology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Meta Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research Problems
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Check Lists
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Risk
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Guidelines
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evidence
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Checklists of Methodological Issues for Review Authors to Consider When Including Non-Randomized Studies in Systematic Reviews
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wells, George A.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Shea, Beverley
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Higgins, Julian P. T.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 03
              Type: published
              Y: 2013
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1759-2879
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 4
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Research Synthesis Methods
              Type: main
ResultId 1