The use of evidence-based research (EBR) approach in reporting guidelines: a cross-sectional study

Article type
Authors
Radosevic T1, Weerasekara I2, Bala M3, Zajac J3, Briel M4, Pieper D5, Puljak L6
1Institute of Emergency Medicine of Split-Dalmatia County, Split, Croatia
2Department of Health and Functioning, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway
3Cochrane Poland, Krakow, Poland
4Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Clinical Research, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
5Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Institute for Health Services and Health System Research, Rüdersdorf, Germany; Center for Health Services Research, Brandenburg Medical School (Theodor Fontane), Rüdersdorf, Germany
6Cochrane Croatia, and PhD program TRIBE, Split, Croatia; Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and Healthcare, Catholic Universtiy of Croatia, Zagreb, Croatia
Abstract
"Background
Evidence-based research (EBR) is defined as “the use of prior research in a systematic and transparent way to inform a new study so that it is answering questions that matter in a valid, efficient, and accessible manner”. An EBR approach is needed to provide justification for a new study, optimally design a relevant and necessary new study, and place the new results in the context of earlier studies. Reporting guidelines should support the use of an EBR approach.
Objectives
We aimed to investigate whether and to what extent reporting guidelines include items concerning an EBR approach (or parts of it), their characteristics, and how these items are operationalized.
Methods
In this cross-sectional study, we included the most recent version of any reporting guideline that included a checklist published on the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network, the scholarly article in which the relevant guideline was published. We included guidelines that apply to the whole report. One author screened all the guidelines and extracted data, Another author verified a sample of the screening and extracted data. We extracted data on whether the checklist and the article(s) describing the guideline addressed the EBR approach to provide justification for a new study, to optimally design a relevant and necessary new study, to place the new results in the context of earlier studies, and whether they defined prior evidence.
Results
Among 531 checklists published on the EQUATOR, we analyzed 167 pertaining to the whole report. EBR approach was addressed in 9 (5.3%) checklists to provide justification for a new study, 3 (1.8%) to optimally design a relevant and necessary new study, and 1 (0.6%) to place the new results in the context of earlier studies. In the accompanying articles, these frequencies/percentages were 2 (1.2%), 0 (0%) and 1 (0.6%), respectively.

Conclusion
Very few of the analyzed checklists and their accompanying article(s), on the EQUATOR website included items that would foster the implementation of EBR principles. Revision of checklists and accompanying guidance should be considered to foster EBR.

Relevance and importance to patients
Direct relevance to reduce research waste.
"