Literature DB >> 28720515

AHRQ series on complex intervention systematic reviews-paper 4: selecting analytic approaches.

Meera Viswanathan1, Melissa L McPheeters2, M Hassan Murad3, Mary E Butler4, Emily E Beth Devine5, Michele P Dyson6, Jeanne-Marie Guise7, Leila C Kahwati8, Jeremy N V Miles9, Sally C Morton10.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of complex interventions can vary widely in purpose, data availability and heterogeneity, and stakeholder expectations. RATIONALE: This article addresses the uncertainty that systematic reviewers face in selecting methods for reviews of complex interventions. Specifically, it lays out parameters for systematic reviewers to consider when selecting analytic approaches that best answer the questions at hand and suggests analytic techniques that may be appropriate in different circumstances. DISCUSSION: Systematic reviews of complex interventions comprising multiple questions may use multiple analytic approaches. Parameters to consider when choosing analytic methods for complex interventions include nature and timing of the decision (clinical practice guideline, policy, or other); purpose of the review; extent of existing evidence; logistic factors such as the timeline, process, and resources for deciding the scope of the review; and value of information to be obtained from choosing specific systematic review methods. Reviewers may elect to revise their analytic approach based on new or changing considerations during the course of the review but should guard against bias through transparency of reporting.
Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Complex interventions; Evidence-based medicine; Qualitative research; Research design; Review literature as topic; Systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28720515     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.014

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


  12 in total

1.  Conceptualizing clinical decision support as complex interventions: a meta-analysis of comparative effectiveness trials.

Authors:  Thomas J Reese; Siru Liu; Bryan Steitz; Allison McCoy; Elise Russo; Brian Koh; Jessica Ancker; Adam Wright
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2022-09-12       Impact factor: 7.942

Review 2.  Pharmacist-Led Self-management Interventions to Improve Diabetes Outcomes. A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Linda van Eikenhorst; Katja Taxis; Liset van Dijk; Han de Gier
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 5.810

3.  Developing methods for the overarching synthesis of quantitative and qualitative evidence: The interweave synthesis approach.

Authors:  Jo Thompson Coon; Ruth Gwernan-Jones; Ruth Garside; Michael Nunns; Liz Shaw; G J Melendez-Torres; Darren Moore
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2019-12-13       Impact factor: 5.273

4.  Does motivational interviewing improve the weight management process in adolescents? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Parisa Amiri; Elham Kazemian; Mohammad Masih Mansouri-Tehrani; Ahmad Khalili; Atieh Amouzegar
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2018-10-30

5.  IMP2ART systematic review of education for healthcare professionals implementing supported self-management for asthma.

Authors:  Nicola McCleary; Amanda Andrews; Audrey Buelo; Mireille Captieux; Susan Morrow; Sharon Wiener-Ogilvie; Monica Fletcher; Liz Steed; Stephanie J C Taylor; Hilary Pinnock
Journal:  NPJ Prim Care Respir Med       Date:  2018-11-06       Impact factor: 2.871

6.  Implementation strategies for interventions to improve the management of chronic kidney disease (CKD) by primary care clinicians: protocol for a systematic review.

Authors:  Celia C Kamath; Claudia C Dobler; Michelle A Lampman; Patricia J Erwin; John Matulis; Muhamad Elrashidi; Rozalina Grubina McCoy; Mouaz Alsawaz; Atieh Pajouhi; Amrit Vasdev; Nilay D Shah; M Hassan Murad; Bjorg Thorsteinsdottir
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-08-08       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Assessing the Effectiveness of Complex Interventions to Meet the Needs of VA Stakeholders: Experience of the Department of Veterans Affairs Evidence Synthesis Program.

Authors:  Timothy J Wilt; Nancy Greer; Wei Duan-Porter
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Lack of transparency in reporting narrative synthesis of quantitative data: a methodological assessment of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Mhairi Campbell; Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi; Amanda Sowden; Hilary Thomson
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2018-09-06       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  A review of methods for addressing components of interventions in meta-analysis.

Authors:  Maria Petropoulou; Orestis Efthimiou; Gerta Rücker; Guido Schwarzer; Toshi A Furukawa; Alessandro Pompoli; Huiberdina L Koek; Cinzia Del Giovane; Nicolas Rodondi; Dimitris Mavridis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Proposed pathway for patients undergoing enhanced recovery after spinal surgery: protocol for a systematic review.

Authors:  Ana Licina; Andrew Silvers; Harry Laughlin; Jeremy Russell; Crispin Wan
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2020-02-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.