Abstract
Abstract
Background
Systematic reviews (SRs) are usually conducted by a highly specialized group of researchers. The routine involvement of methodological experts is a core methodological recommendation. The present commentary describes the qualifications required for information specialists and statisticians involved in SRs, as well as their tasks, the methodological challenges they face, and potential future areas of involvement.
Tasks and qualifications
Information specialists select the information sources, develop search strategies, conduct the searches, and report the results. Statisticians select the methods for evidence synthesis, assess the risk of bias, and interpret the results. The minimum requirements for their involvement in SRs are a suitable university degree (e.g., in statistics or librarian/information science or an equivalent degree), methodological and content expertise, and several years of experience.
Key arguments
The complexity of conducting SRs has greatly increased due to a massive rise in the amount of available evidence and the number and complexity of SR methods, largely statistical and information retrieval methods. Additional challenges exist in the actual conduct of an SR, such as judging how complex the research question could become and what hurdles could arise during the course of the project.
Conclusion
SRs are becoming more and more complex to conduct and information specialists and statisticians should routinely be involved right from the start of the SR. This increases the trustworthiness of SRs as the basis for reliable, unbiased and reproducible health policy, and clinical decision making.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference30 articles.
1. 6. EUnetHTA 21. [Internet] D5.3.1 – Procedural guidance for appointment of assessors and co-assessors for JCA/CA – guidance document [cited 15.08.2022]. 2022. Available from: https://d2yaq9q3r816qg.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/D5.3.1_Appointment_Assessors_CoAssessors-final-version-v1.0.pdf?x69613.
2. 7. Cochrane Community. [Internet] Information Specialists Portal [cited 15.08.2022]. 2022. Available from: https://community.cochrane.org/organizational-info/resources/resources-groups/information-specialists-portal.
3. Considerations on what constitutes a ‘qualified statistician’ in regulatory guidelines;Gerlinger;Stat Med.,2012
4. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both
5. PRISMA-S: An extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews;Rethlefsen;Syst Rev.,2021
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献