The Systematic Review Data Repository 2.0 (SRDR 2.0) – Summary data for end-users

Article type
Authors
Saldanha I1, Jap J1, Jap R2, Senturk B1, Smith B1, Balk E1
1Brown University School of Public Health
2Independent Consultant
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Reports of systematic reviews (SRs) are often too voluminous to be useful for decision-makers. This problem can potentially be solved through interactive displays of key summary data from SRs, with the option to dig deeper into the evidence as needed. To make summaries of SR data more readily accessible to decision-makers digitally and interactively, we have developed and user-tested a new free platform–the Systematic Review Data Repository 2.0 (SRDR 2.0). SRDR 2.0 is funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) in the United States.

OBJECTIVES:
To describe the development of SRDR 2.0 and to demonstrate its use.

METHODS:
We followed three steps: (1) identifying potential structured elements from common items reported in 10 published SRs; (2) finalizing the list of structured elements through iterative discussions with 21 international academic and non-academic stakeholders with diverse perspectives; and (3) building, refining, and user testing a prototype for SRDR 2.0. We have developed SRDR 2.0 as a platform that provides the information of greatest interest to stakeholders in a structured and user-friendly manner.

RESULTS:
The elements in SRDR 2.0 are organized into three levels: Level 1 (meta-data and other information related to the entire SR), Level 2 (related to specific populations, interventions/exposures, comparators, outcomes, study designs, and settings of interest), and Level 3 (related to results for specific outcomes). As illustrated in Figure 1, SRDR 2.0 gathers information from three different types of sources – the SR report (i.e., publication), SRDR (i.e., online data system), and various external online locations. SRDR 2.0 displays the requested information through interactive, user-friendly formats, such as accordion-style headings, where the user clicks on headings to reveal underlying information, and mouse-overs, where underlying information is revealed only when the user hovers the mouse over a heading (see Figure 2).

CONCLUSIONS:
SRDR 2.0 aims to be a new platform for sharing summary SR data digitally and interactively with diverse end-users, such as guideline developers, clinical decision support tool developers, clinicians, patients, and other consumers. The vision is that these diverse end-users will be able to query SRDR 2.0 and usable information about a given SR in a structured format. SRDR 2.0 is part of a suite of new advancements being planned by AHRQ to make its SR reports and other products interactive. At the Colloquium, we will demonstrate live the use of SRDR 2.0. By helping present the relevant information from various types of SRs to decision-makers, SRDR 2.0 has the potential to greatly facilitate evidence-based decision-making.

PATIENT OR CONSUMER INVOLVEMENT:
We involved a consumer representative among the stakeholders who helped define the structured elements. The SRDR 2.0 platform is designed to be used by patients, consumers, and various other end-users.