Literature DB >> 18471656

Systematic reviews can be produced and published faster.

Margaret Sampson1, Kaveh G Shojania, Chantelle Garritty, Tanya Horsley, Mary Ocampo, David Moher.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: As part of a larger project on updating systematic reviews, we studied the currency of reviews at the time of publication to determine typical and achievable times to publication for systematic reviews published in journals, Health Technology Assessment technical reports or Cochrane Collaboration reviews, and examined differences in publication speed between these document types. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: A cohort of systematic reviews of treatment interventions originally published between 1995 and 2005 and indexed in ACP Journal Club was assembled. Dates of search, manuscript submission, acceptance, publication and indexing in MEDLINE were extracted.
RESULTS: One hundred fifty-six reviews meet inclusion criteria. The median time from final search to publication was 61 weeks with an interquartile range of 33-87 weeks. Best (first quartile) performances were for the final search updated to occur within 10 weeks of submission, acceptance for publication within 11 weeks of submission, and publication, print or electronic, within 12 weeks of acceptance.
CONCLUSION: Efforts to reduce the time spent in production of systematic reviews can improve currency. Both authors and publishers can contribute to more rapid production of health care evidence syntheses.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18471656     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.02.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  23 in total

1.  Rapid network meta-analysis using data from Food and Drug Administration approval packages is feasible but with limitations.

Authors:  Lin Wang; Benjamin Rouse; Arielle Marks-Anglin; Rui Duan; Qiyuan Shi; Kevin Quach; Yong Chen; Christopher Cameron; Christopher H Schmid; Tianjing Li
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Aggregator: a machine learning approach to identifying MEDLINE articles that derive from the same underlying clinical trial.

Authors:  Weixiang Shao; Clive E Adams; Aaron M Cohen; John M Davis; Marian S McDonagh; Sujata Thakurta; Philip S Yu; Neil R Smalheiser
Journal:  Methods       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 3.608

3.  Automated medical literature screening using artificial intelligence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yunying Feng; Siyu Liang; Yuelun Zhang; Shi Chen; Qing Wang; Tianze Huang; Feng Sun; Xiaoqing Liu; Huijuan Zhu; Hui Pan
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2022-07-12       Impact factor: 7.942

4.  Aiming for small is a crime.

Authors:  Ss Harsoor; D Devikarani
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2010-01

5.  Text-in-context: a method for extracting findings in mixed-methods mixed research synthesis studies.

Authors:  Margarete Sandelowski; Jennifer Leeman; Kathleen Knafl; Jamie L Crandell
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2012-08-27       Impact factor: 3.187

6.  Are systematic reviews up-to-date at the time of publication?

Authors:  Elaine M Beller; Joyce Kee-Hsin Chen; Una Li-Hsiang Wang; Paul P Glasziou
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2013-05-28

7.  Prioritisation of clinical research by the example of type 2 diabetes: a caregiver-survey on perceived relevance and need for evidence.

Authors:  Stefan Kamprath; Antje Timmer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-03-20       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Evaluation of Issues Affecting Time Between Study Completion, Manuscript Submission, Acceptance, and Publication in Medical Journals.

Authors:  Paresh G Koli; Ankita Kulkarni; Yashashri C Shetty
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-03-15

9.  PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews.

Authors:  Melissa L Rethlefsen; Shona Kirtley; Siw Waffenschmidt; Ana Patricia Ayala; David Moher; Matthew J Page; Jonathan B Koffel
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2021-04-01

10.  Evaluating the relationship between citation set size, team size and screening methods used in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Katie O'Hearn; Cameron MacDonald; Anne Tsampalieros; Leo Kadota; Ryan Sandarage; Supun Kotteduwa Jayawarden; Michele Datko; John M Reynolds; Thanh Bui; Shagufta Sultan; Margaret Sampson; Misty Pratt; Nick Barrowman; Nassr Nama; Matthew Page; James Dayre McNally
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.