RESERVE - REporting of SystEmatic ReViews in Ethics: development, explanations and examples

Author:

Kahrass HannesORCID,Borry PascalORCID,Gastmans ChrisORCID,Ives Jonathan,van der Graaf Rieke,Strech Daniel,Mertz MarcelORCID

Abstract

Background Systematic reviews (SR) are well elaborated and established for synthesizing statistical information, for example of clinical studies, for determining whether a clinical intervention is effective. SRs are also becoming more and more popular in bioethics. However, the established approach of conducting and reporting cannot be transferred to SRs on ethically sensible questions directly. This is because the object of investigation is not statistical information, but conceptual or normative information, e.g. ethical norms, principles, arguments or conclusions. There is evidence that the quality of reporting of SRs on ethics literature could be improved in many regards. Although insufficient reporting is not a problem specific to bioethics, as poorly reported manuscripts are also very common in SRs in e.g. medicine, authors of such SRs have the possibility to follow existing reporting guidelines (e.g. PRISMA). Method An international group of authors with years of experience in conducting and reviewing SRs on ethics literature developed a reporting guideline for this specific area of application (RESERVE). The relevant background was provided by two reporting guidelines: PRISMA for systematic reviews and ENTREQ due to the importance of qualitative research approaches. Results RESERVE has 22 items and is intended to provide authors of SRs on ethics literature with all information necessary for an adequate reporting. It also allows readers, reviewers and journal editors critically evaluating the presented results and conclusions made. In this paper, we explain the rationale and give examples for each item. Conclusions While we acknowledge heterogeneity on how to conduct a SR on ethics literature, we still maintain that there is a need for general reporting standards for improving transparency, understandability and verifiability. We invite authors of SRs on ethics literature to test and evaluate the usefulness of RESERVE. We hope for a critical discussion of the guideline and welcome its broad implementation.

Publisher

F1000 Research Ltd

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3