They aim to provide users with a balanced summary of the potential benefits and harms of interventions and give an indication of how certain they can be of the findings. Cochrane Reviews use primary research to generate new knowledge about the effects of an intervention (or interventions) used in clinical, public health or policy settings. This Handbook is about systematic reviews on the effects of interventions, and specifically about methods used by Cochrane to undertake them. This involves: the a priori specification of a research question clarity on the scope of the review and which studies are eligible for inclusion making every effort to find all relevant research and to ensure that issues of bias in included studies are accounted for and analysing the included studies in order to draw conclusions based on all the identified research in an impartial and objective way. Systematic review methodology, pioneered and developed by Cochrane, sets out a highly structured, transparent and reproducible methodology (Chandler and Hopewell 2013). It uses explicit, systematic methods that are selected with a view to minimizing bias, thus providing more reliable findings from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made (Antman et al 1992, Oxman and Guyatt 1993). Just as primary research studies use methods to avoid bias, so should summaries and syntheses of that research.Ī systematic review attempts to collate all the empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a specific research question. Systematic reviews address the main problem with ad hoc searching and selection of research, namely that of bias. By systematically assessing this primary research, systematic reviews aim to provide an up-to-date summary of the state of research knowledge on an intervention, diagnostic test, prognostic factor or other health or healthcare topic.
With the volume of research literature growing at an ever-increasing rate, it is impossible for individual decision makers to assess this vast quantity of primary research to enable them to make the most appropriate healthcare decisions that do more good than harm.
Systematic reviews were developed out of a need to ensure that decisions affecting people’s lives can be informed by an up-to-date and complete understanding of the relevant research evidence. Available from 1.1 Why do a systematic review? Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022). In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Good data management, project management and quality assurance mechanisms are essential for the completion of a successful systematic review.Ĭite this chapter as: Lasserson TJ, Thomas J, Higgins JPT. People who might make – or be affected by – decisions around the use of interventions should be involved in important decisions about the review.
Pro tools 101 questions lesson 10 free#
Systematic reviews should be conducted by a team that includes domain expertise and methodological expertise, who are free of potential conflicts of interest.
Systematic reviews aim to minimize bias through the use of pre-specified research questions and methods that are documented in protocols, and by basing their findings on reliable research. Systematic reviews address a need for health decision makers to be able to access high quality, relevant, accessible and up-to-date information.
0 kommentar(er)
