Article type
Year
Abstract
Background:
Living systematic reviews represent a novel approach to maintaining currency in the world of rapidly evolving evidence. As part of the broader Australian Living Evidence Consortium, the Living Evidence for Diabetes program is focused on developing living systematic reviews and associated clinical guidelines within two priority areas of diabetes care; the use of medical device technology in type 1 diabetes, and therapeutics for blood glucose control in type 2 diabetes.
Objectives:
To develop and implement a system in which two systematic reviews, developed as part of the Living Evidence for Diabetes demonstration project, are rapidly updated through the integration of new and relevant evidence.
Methods:
Traditional systematic reviews were developed for each of the priority topics. Implementation of a living system involves monthly searching of PubMed, Embase and CENTRAL, pre-screening of citations using an RCT classifier and study selection within Covidence. These methods utilise an iterative approach to determine the potential impact of new data on the existing evidence base, and analyses are updated where required.
Results:
A platform was established in which new and relevant evidence is identified and incorporated frequently as and when it becomes available. This process is facilitated through the application of an RCT classifier, use of crowd sourcing to screen potential studies and utilisation of an expert panel for assessing the likely relevance and impact of new evidence. Results from both living systematic reviews are used as a basis for the living Australian Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines for Diabetes
Conclusions:
This project is an exemplar of the methods used to maintain currency of systematic reviews through the frequent searching, analysis and incorporation of new and relevant evidence. The utility of these reviews as a foundation for clinical guidelines ensures that patients receive the best possible care based on available evidence.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement:
Patients and consumers are involved in determining the clinical questions, interpreting the evidence and assist in generating clinical guideline recommendations using the evidence.
Living systematic reviews represent a novel approach to maintaining currency in the world of rapidly evolving evidence. As part of the broader Australian Living Evidence Consortium, the Living Evidence for Diabetes program is focused on developing living systematic reviews and associated clinical guidelines within two priority areas of diabetes care; the use of medical device technology in type 1 diabetes, and therapeutics for blood glucose control in type 2 diabetes.
Objectives:
To develop and implement a system in which two systematic reviews, developed as part of the Living Evidence for Diabetes demonstration project, are rapidly updated through the integration of new and relevant evidence.
Methods:
Traditional systematic reviews were developed for each of the priority topics. Implementation of a living system involves monthly searching of PubMed, Embase and CENTRAL, pre-screening of citations using an RCT classifier and study selection within Covidence. These methods utilise an iterative approach to determine the potential impact of new data on the existing evidence base, and analyses are updated where required.
Results:
A platform was established in which new and relevant evidence is identified and incorporated frequently as and when it becomes available. This process is facilitated through the application of an RCT classifier, use of crowd sourcing to screen potential studies and utilisation of an expert panel for assessing the likely relevance and impact of new evidence. Results from both living systematic reviews are used as a basis for the living Australian Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines for Diabetes
Conclusions:
This project is an exemplar of the methods used to maintain currency of systematic reviews through the frequent searching, analysis and incorporation of new and relevant evidence. The utility of these reviews as a foundation for clinical guidelines ensures that patients receive the best possible care based on available evidence.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement:
Patients and consumers are involved in determining the clinical questions, interpreting the evidence and assist in generating clinical guideline recommendations using the evidence.