Systematic reviews, overviews of reviews and comparative effectiveness reviews: A discussion of approaches to knowledge synthesis

Evidence-Based Child Health

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 486-494

  Hartling, Lisa ^a,b   Vandermeer, Ben ^a   Fernandes, Ricardo M ^c,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^c Instituto de Medicina Molecular   (Portugal)

^d HOSPITAL DE SANTA MARIA   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Comparative effectiveness reviews; Meta analysis; Mixed treatment comparison; Network meta analysis; Overviews of reviews; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

ADRENALIN; BRONCHODILATING AGENT; PLACEBO; SALBUTAMOL; STEROID;

BRONCHIOLITIS; COCHRANE LIBRARY; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; DATA SYNTHESIS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; METHODOLOGY; OVERVIEWS OF REVIEWS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPIRATORY SYNCYTIAL PNEUMOVIRUS; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); CHILD; CHILD WELFARE; HUMAN; LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC);

BRONCHIOLITIS; CHILD; CHILD WELFARE; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84902531889     PISSN: 20404050     EISSN: 15576272     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ebch.1968     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. Glass G. Integrating findings: the meta-analysis of research. Rev Res Educ 1977; 5: 351-379.
2. Smith M, Glass G. Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. Am Psychol 1977; 32: 752-760.
3. Grimshaw J. A Guide to Knowledge Synthesis: A Knowledge Synthesis Chapter. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Institute of Health Research; 2010.
4. Becker LA, Oxman AD. Chapter 22: Overviews of reviews. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
5. Meltzer H. Review of reviews in industrial psychology, 1950-1968. Pers Psychol 1972; 25: 201-222.
6. Petticrew M, Roberts H. Systematic Reviews in Social Science: A Practical Guide. Oxford: Blackwell; 2006.
7. Sox H, Helfand M, Grimshaw J, Dickersin K, Tovey D, Knottnerus J, et al. Comparative effectiveness research: challenges for medical journals. Med Decis Making 2010; 30: 301-303.
8. Sox H. Defining comparative effectiveness research: the importance of getting it right. Med Care 2010; 48(6 Suppl): S7-S8.
9. Inglehart J. Prioritizing comparative-effectiveness research-IOM recommendations. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 325-328.
10. Lauer M, Collins F. Using science to improve the nation's health system: NIH's commitment to comparative effectiveness research. JAMA 2010; 303: 2182-2183.
11. Salanti G. Indirect and mixed-treatment comparison, network, or multiple-treatments meta-analysis: many names, many benefits, many concerns for the next generation evidence synthesis tool. Res Synth Methods 2012; 3: 80-97.
12. Lam S, Owen A. Combined resynchronisation and implantable defibrillator therapy in left ventricular dysfunction: Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMJ 2007; 335: 925.
13. Elliott W, Meyer P. Incident diabetes in clinical trials of antihypertensive drugs: a network meta-analysis. Lancet 2007; 369: 201-207.
14. Trikalinos T, Sheikh-Ali A, Tatsioni A, Nallamothu B, Kent D. Percutaneous coronary interventions for non-acute coronary artery disease: a quantitative 20-year synopsis and a network meta-analysis. Lancet 2009; 373: 911-918.
15. Psaty B, Lumley T, Furberg C, Schellenbaum G, Pahor M, Alderman M, et al. Health outcomes associated with various antihypertensive therapies used as first-line agents: a network meta-analysis. JAMA 2003; 289: 2534-2544.
16. Stettler C, Wandel S, Allemann S, Kastrati A, Morice M, Schomig A, et al. Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis. Lancet 2007; 370: 937-948.
17. National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence. Evidence Synthesis. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. London: NICE; 2008.
18. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH). 2013. Available at: http://www.cadth.ca/ [accessed on 25 November 2013].
19. Fernandes R, Bialy L, Vandermeer B, Tjosvold L, Plint A, Patel H, et al. Glucocorticoids for acute viral bronchiolitis in infants and young children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; 10: CD004878.
20. Bialy L, Foisy M, Smith M, Fernandes R. The Cochrane Library and the treatment of bronchiolitis in children: an overview of reviews. Evid-Based Child Health 2011; 6: 258-275.
21. Hartling L, Fernandes R, Bialy L, Johnson D, Plint A, Klassen T, et al. Epinephrine for bronchiolitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; 6: CD003123.
22. Hartling L, Fernandes R, Bialy L, Milne S, Johnson D, Plint A, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of steroids and bronchodilators for acute bronchiolitis. BMJ 2011; 342: d1714.
23. Smyth R, Openshaw P. Bronchiolitis. Lancet 2006; 368: 312-322.
24. Plint A, Johnson D, Wiebe N, Bulloch B, Pusic M, Joubert G, et al. Practice variation among pediatric emergency departments in the treatment of bronchiolitis. Acad Emerg Med 2004; 11: 353-360.
25. Babl F, Sheriff N, Neutze J, Borland M, Oakley E. Bronchiolitis management in pediatric emergency departments in Australia and New Zealand: a PREDICT study. Pediatr Emerg Care 2008; 24: 656-658.
26. Egger M, Smith GD, Altman D. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context. London: BMJ Books; 2001.
27. Higgins J, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011 Available at: www.cochrane-handbook.org.
28. The Cochrane Collaboration. About the Cochrane Library. 2013. Available at: http://www.cochrane.org/cochrane-reviews/about-cochrane-library [accessed on 25 November 2013].
29. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med 2010; 7: e1000326.
30. Davey J, Turner R, Clarke M, Higgins J. Characteristics of meta-analyses and their component studies in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews: a cross-sectional, descriptive study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011; 11: 160.
31. Liberati A, Altman D, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche P, Ioannidis J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2009; 6: e1000100.
32. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco A, Sampson M, Altman D. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med 2007; 4: e78.
33. Guyatt G, Oxman A, Akl E, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64: 383-394.
34. Glenton C, Underland V, Kho M, Pennick V, Oxman A. Summaries of findings, descriptions of interventions, and information about adverse effects would make reviews more informative. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59: 770-778.
35. Straus S, Haynes B. Managing evidence-based knowledge: the need for reliable, relevant and readable resources. CMAJ 2009; 180: 942-945.
36. Comparing Multiple Interventions Methods Group. Review Type & Methodological Considerations. Background Paper for the First Part of the Paris CMIMG Discussion. 2012. Available at: http://cmimg.cochrane.org/Paris-2012 [accessed on 16 October 2012].
37. Caldwell D, Welton N, Ades A. Mixed treatment comparison analysis provides internally coherent treatment effect estimates based on overviews of reviews and can reveal inconsistency. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63: 875-882.
38. Hartling L, Chisholm A, Thomson D, Dryden D. A descriptive analysis of overviews of reviews published between 2009 and 2011. PLoS One 2012; 7: e49667.
39. Comparing Multiple Interventions Methods Group. Meeting Minutes, Thursday April 19, 2012. Paris, France, 2012. Available at: http://cmimg.cochrane.org/Paris-2012 [accessed on 16 October 2012].
40. Thomson D, Russell K, Becker L, Klassen T, Hartling L. The evolution of a new publication type: steps and challenges of producing overviews of reviews. Res Synth Methods 2010; 1(3-4): 198-211.
41. Thomson D, Foisy M, Oleszczuk M, Wingert A, Chisholm A, Hartling L. Overviews of reviews in child health: evidence synthesis and the knowledge base for a specific population. Evid-Based Child Health 2013; 8: 3-10.
42. Deeks J. Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta-analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes. Stat Med 2002; 2: 1575-1600.
43. Jansen J, Fleurence R, Devine B, Itzler R, Barrett A, Hawkins N, et al. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons & network meta-analysis for health care decision-making: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices - Part 1. Value Health 2011; 14: 417-428.
44. Hoaglin D, Hawkins N, Jansen J, Scott D, Itzler R, Cappelleri J, et al. Conducting indirect-treatment-comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on indirect treatment comparisons good research practices - Part 2. Value Health 2011; 14: 429-437.
45. Moher D, Tsertsvadze A, Tricco A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Sampson M, et al. When and how to update systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; 1: MR000023.
46. Jadad A, Cook D, Browman G. A guide to interpreting discordant systematic reviews. CMAJ 1997; 156: 1411-1416.
47. Lu G, Ades A. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med 2004; 23: 3105-3124.
48. Ioannidis J. Integration of evidence from multiple meta-analyses: a primer on umbrella reviews, treatment networks and multiple treatments meta-analyses. CMAJ 2009; 181: 488-493.
49. Smith T, Spiegelhalter D, Thomas A. Bayesian approaches to random-effects meta-analysis: a comparative study. Stat Med 1995; 14: 2685-2699.
50. Vandermeer B, Buscemi N, Liang Y, Witmans M. Comparison of meta-analytic results of indirect, direct, and combined comparisons of drugs for chronic insomnia in adults: a case study. Med Care 2007; 45: S166-S172.
51. Salanti G, Ades A, Ioannidis J. Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64: 163-171.
52. Song F, Loke Y, Walsh T, Glenny A, Eastwood A, Altman D. Methodological problems in the use of indirect comparisons for evaluating healthcare interventions: survey of published systematic reviews. BMJ 2009; 338: b1147.
53. Song F, Xiong T, Parekh-Bhurke S, Loke Y, Sutton A, Eastwood A, et al. Inconsistency between direct and indirect comparisons of competing interventions: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 2011; 343: d4909.
54. Li T, Puhan M, Vedula S, Singh S, Dickersin K. Ad Hoc network meta-analysis methods meeting working group. BMC Med 2011; 9: 79.