Article type
Abstract
Background: Systematic reviews (SR) are essential to ensure that decisions are informed by an up-to-date and complete understanding of the relevant research evidence. Conducting SR within a doctoral thesis can limit the conduct of subsequent redundant, harmful, and unethical research, support in locating knowledge gaps, and obtaining important skills to critically consume and use research. The output and learning process of SR overlaps with the aims of doctoral programs.
Objective: To explore to what extent SR are included in doctoral theses from all medical faculties in Sweden, to describe the type, topic and assess the credibility of the reviews.
Methods: Local and national repositories were searched for doctoral theses published in 2021 within all the seven Medical Faculties in Sweden and were assessed in duplicate. Any identified SR were categorised based on review type, topic, and credibility using AMSTAR-2.
Results: Only 1.3% (45/3461) of all studies were reviews of any type, and 5.4% (45/852) of all doctoral theses included a review. Two thirds (31) were SR and the rest (14) were broader ‘big picture’ reviews. Most common topic were interventions (42%) and exposure/etiology (32%), with no reviews of diagnostic tests. The majority of the SRs had very low (71%) or low (19%) credibility, few reached a high (7%) or moderate (3%) credibility. The most common issues were limitations with protocols, limited search strategies, and not accounting for risk of bias within conclusions.
Conclusions: Few doctoral students conduct and include SR in their theses, and hence do not get experience in using SR-methods or to systematically evaluate their field of study. The low credibility of conducted SR is also a concern. Discussions are needed at the university- and nation levels regarding the current level of SR, and to determine if and how improvements could be accomplished. If conducting high quality SR are considered an important goal in the training of the future generation of researchers - actions are needed to support doctoral students to conduct SR.
Importance to patients: Conduct and understanding of SR could improve future healthcare decisions and health research, particularly when conducted by clinicians doing their doctoral studies.
Objective: To explore to what extent SR are included in doctoral theses from all medical faculties in Sweden, to describe the type, topic and assess the credibility of the reviews.
Methods: Local and national repositories were searched for doctoral theses published in 2021 within all the seven Medical Faculties in Sweden and were assessed in duplicate. Any identified SR were categorised based on review type, topic, and credibility using AMSTAR-2.
Results: Only 1.3% (45/3461) of all studies were reviews of any type, and 5.4% (45/852) of all doctoral theses included a review. Two thirds (31) were SR and the rest (14) were broader ‘big picture’ reviews. Most common topic were interventions (42%) and exposure/etiology (32%), with no reviews of diagnostic tests. The majority of the SRs had very low (71%) or low (19%) credibility, few reached a high (7%) or moderate (3%) credibility. The most common issues were limitations with protocols, limited search strategies, and not accounting for risk of bias within conclusions.
Conclusions: Few doctoral students conduct and include SR in their theses, and hence do not get experience in using SR-methods or to systematically evaluate their field of study. The low credibility of conducted SR is also a concern. Discussions are needed at the university- and nation levels regarding the current level of SR, and to determine if and how improvements could be accomplished. If conducting high quality SR are considered an important goal in the training of the future generation of researchers - actions are needed to support doctoral students to conduct SR.
Importance to patients: Conduct and understanding of SR could improve future healthcare decisions and health research, particularly when conducted by clinicians doing their doctoral studies.