Methodological approaches in conducting overviews: Current state in HTA agencies

Research Synthesis Methods

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 187-199

  Pieper, Dawid ^a   Antoine, Sunya Lee ^a   Morfeld, Jana Carina ^a   Mathes, Tim ^a   Eikermann, Michaela ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WITTEN HERDECKE   (Germany)

Author keywords

Policy making; Public policy; Review; Technology assessment; Time factor

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; DATA MINING; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; LITERATURE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; PUBLICATION; STANDARDS; TRENDS;

DATA MINING; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; INTERNATIONALITY; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84959347571     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17592887     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1107     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures - Surgical. 2007. Rapid versus full systematic reviews: an inventory of current methods and practice in Health Technology Assessment. Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures - Surgical (ASERNIP-S).
2. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Meerpohl J, Norris S, Guyatt GH. 2011. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 64: 401-406.
3. Bambra C, Joyce KE, Bellis MA, Greatley A, Greengross S, Hughes S, Lincoln P, Lobstein T, Naylor C, Salay R, Wiseman M, Maryon-Davis A. 2010. Reducing health inequalities in priority public health conditions: using rapid review to develop proposals for evidence-based policy. Journal of Public Health (Oxford, England) 32: 496-505.
4. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. 2010. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Medicine 7: e1000326.
5. Becker L, Oxman A. 2008. Chapter 22: overviews of reviews. In Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Higgins JPT, Green S (eds). John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (UK).
6. Chambers D, Wilson P. 2012. A framework for production of systematic review based briefings to support evidence-informed decision-making. Systematic Reviews 1: 32.
7. Cheong WJ, Yang SH, Ali F. 2013. Molecular imprinted polymers for separation science: a review of reviews. Journal of Separation Science 36: 609-628.
8. Cooper H, Koenka AC. 2012. The overview of reviews: unique challenges and opportunities when research syntheses are the principal elements of new integrative scholarship. American Psychologist 67(6): 446-62. doi: 10.1037/a0027119
9. Corio M, Paone S, Ferroni E, Meier H, Jefferson T, Cerbo M. 2011. Systematic review of the methodological instruments used in Health Technology Assessment. Rome.
10. Ding D, Gebel K. 2012. Built environment, physical activity, and obesity: what have we learned from reviewing the literature? Health & Place 18: 100-105.
11. Eriksson I, Cater Å, Andershed AK, Andershed H. 2010. What we know and need to know about factors that protect youth from problems: a review of previous reviews. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 5: 477-482.
12. Eriksson I, Cater A, Andershed AK, Andershed H. 2011. What protects youths from externalising and internalising problems? A critical review of research findings and implications for practice. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling 21: 113-125.
13. Fronsdal KB, Facey K, Klemp M, Norderhaug IN, Morland B, Rottingen JA. 2010. Health Technology Assessment to optimize health technology utilization: using implementation initiatives and monitoring processes. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 26: 309-316.
14. Ganann R, Ciliska D, Thomas H. 2010. Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews. Implementation Science 5: 56.
15. Hartling L, Chisholm A, Thomson D, Dryden DM. 2012. A descriptive analysis of overviews of reviews published between 2000 and 2011. PLoS ONE 7: e49667.
16. Jadad AR, Cook DJ, Browman GP. 1997. A guide to interpreting discordant systematic reviews. CMAJ 156: 1411-1416.
17. Knelangen M, Zschorlich B, Buchter R, Fechtelpeter D, Rhodes T, Bastian H. 2010. Online surveys at www.gesundheitsinformation.de: identifying the potential need for evidence-based health information. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen 104: 667-673.
18. Lavis JN. 2009. How can we support the use of systematic reviews in policymaking? PLoS Medicine 6: e1000141.
19. Liel C 2013. Parenting programs for mothers who are at risk or indicated for child abuse and neglect - a systematic review of the international research literature. Programme für Mütter mit schädigendem Erziehungsverhalten, das das Risiko oder den Tatbestand einer Kindeswohlgefährdung darstellt: Eine systematische Analyse der internationalen Forschungsliteratur 60: 11-25.
20. Moher D, Tsertsvadze A, Tricco AC, Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Sampson M, Barrowman N. 2008. When and how to update systematic reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews MR000023.
21. National Health and Medical Research Council. 2009. NHMRC additional levels of evidence and grades for recommendations for developers of guidelines - Stage 2 Pilot [Online]. Available: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/guidelines/stage_2_consultation_levels_and_grades.pdf [Accessed 26.08.2013.
22. Nielsen CP, Funch TM, Kristensen FB. 2011. Health Technology Assessment: research trends and future priorities in Europe. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 16(Suppl 2): 6-15.
23. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. 1991. Validation of an index of the quality of review articles. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 44: 1271-1278.
24. Pieper D, Buechter R, Jerinic P, Eikermann M. 2012. Overviews of reviews often have limited rigor: a systematic review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 65: 1267-1273.
25. Shea BJ, Grimshaw J, Wells G, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, Porter A, Tugwell P, Moher D, Bouter LM. 2007. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology 7.
26. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D. 2007. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine 147: 224-233.
27. Smith V, Devane D, Begley CM, Clarke M. 2011. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Medical Research Methodology 11: 15.
28. Thomson D, Russell K, Becker L, Klassen T, Hartling L. 2010. The evolution of a new publication type: steps and challenges of producing overviews of reviews. Research Synthesis Methods 1: 198-211.
29. Watt A, Cameron A, Sturm L, Lathlean T, Babidge W, Blamey S, Facey K, Hailey D, Norderhaug I, Maddern G. 2008. Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: an inventory of current methods and practice in Health Technology Assessment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 24: 133-139.
30. Whitlock EP, Lin JS, Chou R, Shekelle P, Robinson KA. 2008. Using existing systematic reviews in complex systematic reviews. Annals of Internal Medicine 148: 776-782.