Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Well conducted systematic reviews provide the most reliable answers to healthcare questions. The UK's NHS Cancer Specialist Library, a comprehensive online evidence-based resource for health professionals, systematically identifies high level evidence in cancer. This is organized and presented in a variety of ways on the Library.
Objectives: To quantify how many systematic reviews have been performed in oncology, and to determine what proportion of these are Cochrane Reviews.
Methods: The Procite database, which is used to manage all resources on the Cancer Specialist Library, was searched for systematic reviews published between 2000-2006.
Results: 3,370 systematic reviews have been published in cancer between 2000-2006 showing a linear growth of cancer systematic reviews in recent years. On average, 2 systematic reviews were published every day in 2006. Approximately 6% of the total number of cancer systematic reviews published between 2000 and 2006 are Cochrane Reviews. The number of Cochrane Reviews in oncology has steadily increased from 12 published in 2000 to 39 published in 2006.
Conclusions: Overall, the volume of high level evidence in oncology is increasing. Whether this linear growth can fill knowledge gaps in cancer care is dependent on two factors: firstly that the emerging systematic reviews are reliable and robust - for this full appraisal is required and secondly, that they address questions that actually matter to health professionals and patients. The increase in cancer systematic reviews over the past 6 years is indicative of a number of potential developments. For example, that there is a growing amount of primary research in oncology, more researchers are conducting secondary research, or that there is (increasing?) duplication in topic selection. By quantifying how much high level evidence already exists in oncology and making this evidence available via the Cancer Specialist Library, it is possible for producers of reviews, such as the Cochrane Collaboration to identify gaps in cancer knowledge and prioritise future topics accordingly.
Objectives: To quantify how many systematic reviews have been performed in oncology, and to determine what proportion of these are Cochrane Reviews.
Methods: The Procite database, which is used to manage all resources on the Cancer Specialist Library, was searched for systematic reviews published between 2000-2006.
Results: 3,370 systematic reviews have been published in cancer between 2000-2006 showing a linear growth of cancer systematic reviews in recent years. On average, 2 systematic reviews were published every day in 2006. Approximately 6% of the total number of cancer systematic reviews published between 2000 and 2006 are Cochrane Reviews. The number of Cochrane Reviews in oncology has steadily increased from 12 published in 2000 to 39 published in 2006.
Conclusions: Overall, the volume of high level evidence in oncology is increasing. Whether this linear growth can fill knowledge gaps in cancer care is dependent on two factors: firstly that the emerging systematic reviews are reliable and robust - for this full appraisal is required and secondly, that they address questions that actually matter to health professionals and patients. The increase in cancer systematic reviews over the past 6 years is indicative of a number of potential developments. For example, that there is a growing amount of primary research in oncology, more researchers are conducting secondary research, or that there is (increasing?) duplication in topic selection. By quantifying how much high level evidence already exists in oncology and making this evidence available via the Cancer Specialist Library, it is possible for producers of reviews, such as the Cochrane Collaboration to identify gaps in cancer knowledge and prioritise future topics accordingly.