Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Equity-focused reviews are increasingly promoted and published by groups such as the Cochrane Public Health Review Group, the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Review Group, the HIV/AIDS Review Group and the Campbell International Development Group. These reviews may have specific methods, participants or settings that need to be reported transparently which are not included in the existing, internationally-recognized reporting guidelines for systematic reviews PRISMA(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses).
Objectives: To assess whether equity-focused reviews require additional or modified items in the PRISMA reporting guidelines.
Methods: We conducted a Cochrane methodology review and a methodology study and we assessed three equity-focused systematic reviews using PRISMA.
Results: We found that equity analyses and applicability judgments were reported in insufficient detail to judge their credibility in our methodology study and Cochrane methodology review. We found 11 areas where PRISMA items needed to be modified or added to reflect special methods and concerns in equity-focused systematic reviews. These items related to the definition of health equity and rationale for assessing it, choice of study designs, search strategies, process evaluation, analysis of effects on equity in health status and judgments about applicability and generalizability.
Conclusions: There is a need for modified PRISMA reporting guidelines for equity-focused reviews to reflect specific concerns and methods used. The Campbell and Cochrane Equity Methods Group is leading the development of an Equity-Extension to PRISMA, and invites Cochrane members to participate in a Delphi process and online survey to select and prioritize items.
Objectives: To assess whether equity-focused reviews require additional or modified items in the PRISMA reporting guidelines.
Methods: We conducted a Cochrane methodology review and a methodology study and we assessed three equity-focused systematic reviews using PRISMA.
Results: We found that equity analyses and applicability judgments were reported in insufficient detail to judge their credibility in our methodology study and Cochrane methodology review. We found 11 areas where PRISMA items needed to be modified or added to reflect special methods and concerns in equity-focused systematic reviews. These items related to the definition of health equity and rationale for assessing it, choice of study designs, search strategies, process evaluation, analysis of effects on equity in health status and judgments about applicability and generalizability.
Conclusions: There is a need for modified PRISMA reporting guidelines for equity-focused reviews to reflect specific concerns and methods used. The Campbell and Cochrane Equity Methods Group is leading the development of an Equity-Extension to PRISMA, and invites Cochrane members to participate in a Delphi process and online survey to select and prioritize items.