Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: An increasingly large number and broad spectrum of groups are using systematic reviews. Such reviews are most helpful if they are up to date. A systematic review of methods/strategies describing when and how to update systematic reviews would bring some clarity to the topic and also highlight existing gaps in the evidence.
Objectives: To conduct a systematic review of methods and strategies describing when and/or how to update systematic reviews.
Methods: We electronically searched MEDLINE (1966 to December 2005), PsycINFO, the Cochrane Methodology Register (2006, Issue 1), and handsearched the 2005 Cochrane Colloquium proceedings. We sought to include records (e.g. methodology reports, updated systematic reviews, commentaries, or other short reports) describing the development, use or comparison of method(s) or strategy(s) for updating or determining the need for updating systematic reviews in health care. We extracted information from each included report using a 15-item questionnaire.
Results: Five strategies and two statistical methods describing when and/or how to update systematic reviews were identified. Three of the five strategies addressed various steps needed for updating systematic reviews. Of the two remaining strategies, one reported a model for the assessment of the need to update systematic reviews and the other suggested the use of in-process citations when updating a review. The strategies have not been empirically tested or compared. The two statistical methods were cumulative metaanalysis (with several methodological extensions) and a test for detecting outdated meta-analyses with statistically non-significant results.
Conclusions: Little research has been conducted on when and/or how to update systematic reviews. Furthermore, the economic
issues associated with updating systematic reviews have not been investigated. This is in contrast to substantial developments in other methodological areas of conducting systematic reviews. The feasibility and efficiency of the identified methods/strategies are uncertain. Commissioning agencies and other groups should fund the development of practical and efficient methodologies for updating systematic reviews.
Objectives: To conduct a systematic review of methods and strategies describing when and/or how to update systematic reviews.
Methods: We electronically searched MEDLINE (1966 to December 2005), PsycINFO, the Cochrane Methodology Register (2006, Issue 1), and handsearched the 2005 Cochrane Colloquium proceedings. We sought to include records (e.g. methodology reports, updated systematic reviews, commentaries, or other short reports) describing the development, use or comparison of method(s) or strategy(s) for updating or determining the need for updating systematic reviews in health care. We extracted information from each included report using a 15-item questionnaire.
Results: Five strategies and two statistical methods describing when and/or how to update systematic reviews were identified. Three of the five strategies addressed various steps needed for updating systematic reviews. Of the two remaining strategies, one reported a model for the assessment of the need to update systematic reviews and the other suggested the use of in-process citations when updating a review. The strategies have not been empirically tested or compared. The two statistical methods were cumulative metaanalysis (with several methodological extensions) and a test for detecting outdated meta-analyses with statistically non-significant results.
Conclusions: Little research has been conducted on when and/or how to update systematic reviews. Furthermore, the economic
issues associated with updating systematic reviews have not been investigated. This is in contrast to substantial developments in other methodological areas of conducting systematic reviews. The feasibility and efficiency of the identified methods/strategies are uncertain. Commissioning agencies and other groups should fund the development of practical and efficient methodologies for updating systematic reviews.
PDF