Improving efficiency of systematic reviews production through an exploration of available methods and tools – a scoping review

AFFENGRUBER, Lisa, Miriam VAN DER MATEN, Lotty HOOFT, Barbara NUSSBAUMERSTREIT, Mersiha MAHMIĆ-KAKNJO, María E. MARQUÉS, Eduard BALADIA, Moriah ELLEN, Raluca SFETCU, Panagiotis-Nikolaos LALAGKAS, Georgios POULENTZAS, Nicoletta RIVA, Käthe GOOSSEN, Lucia KANTOROVÁ, Michele SASSANO, Angelo Maria PEZZULLO, Patricia MARTÍNEZ ASENSIO, Gerald GARTLEHNER a René SPIJKER. Improving efficiency of systematic reviews production through an exploration of available methods and tools – a scoping review. In 2nd Evidence -Based Research conference. 2021.

Základní údaje

• Originální název: Improving efficiency of systematic reviews production through an exploration of available methods and tools – a scoping review
• Autoři: AFFENGRUBER, Lisa, Miriam VAN DER MATEN, Lotty HOOFT, Barbara NUSSBAUMERSTREIT, Mersiha MAHMIĆ-KAKNJO, María E. MARQUÉS, Eduard BALADIA, Moriah ELLEN, Raluca SFETCU, Panagiotis-Nikolaos LALAGKAS, Georgios POULENTZAS, Nicoletta RIVA, Käthe GOOSSEN, Lucia KANTOROVÁ, Michele SASSANO, Angelo Maria PEZZULLO, Patricia MARTÍNEZ ASENSIO, Gerald GARTLEHNER a René SPIJKER.
• Vydání: 2nd Evidence -Based Research conference, 2021.

Další údaje

• Originální jazyk: angličtina
• Typ výsledku: Konferenční abstrakt
• Utajení: není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
• WWW: URL
• Organizační jednotka: Lékařská fakulta
• Klíčová slova anglicky: systematic review; PROBAST; evidence synthesis

Anotace

Aim The primary objective is to conduct a scoping review to explore evaluated and fully developed methods and tools used to improve the efficiency of systematic review (SR) production. The second objective is to map identified methods and tools against various context factors. Methods We conducted searches in Ovid, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science from 1997 for methods and from 2005 for tools to November 2020. Two reviewers performed study 18 selection independently. One reviewer is performing data abstraction, which a second one is checking. Two reviewers independently will assess the quality and applicability of included studies and underlying methods/tools by adapting the PROBAST (Prediction model study Risk Of Bias Assessment) Tool. We will summarize the results narratively and categorize them according to the steps of the SR process. We plan to map methods and tools against various contexts of evidence-synthesis (e.g. clinical/policy decision-making, informing new research). Results We identified 6314 references, of which 243 full texts were assessed. 70 references met our eligibility criteria. Currently, we are extracting the data of eligible studies. Results will be available at the time of the conference. Conclusion As a result of this research project, we will be able to give an overview of evaluated review methods and automation tools used to improve the efficiency of SR production and of their contexts of evidence-synthesis applicability.