Toolkit of methodological resources to conduct systematic reviews

Marta Roqué; Laura Martínez-García; Ivan Solà; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Xavier Bonfill; Javier Zamora

doi:10.12688/f1000research.22032.3

Toolkit of methodological resources to conduct systematic reviews

F1000Res. 2020 Feb 4:9:82. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.22032.3. eCollection 2020.

Authors

Marta Roqué^{1

2}, Laura Martínez-García^{1

2}, Ivan Solà^{1

2}, Pablo Alonso-Coello^{1

2}, Xavier Bonfill^{1

2

3}, Javier Zamora^{2

4}

Affiliations

¹ Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre - Sant Pau Biomedical Research Institute (IIB-Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain.
² CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain.
³ Autonomous University of Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
⁴ Clinical Biostatistics Unit, Ramón y Cajal Health Research Institute, Madrid, Spain.

Abstract

Background: Systematic reviews (SR) can be classified by type depending on the research question they are based on. This work identifies and describes the most relevant methodological resources to conduct high-quality reviews that answer health care questions regarding prevalence, prognosis, diagnostic accuracy and effects of interventions. Methods: Methodological resources have been identified from literature searches and consulting guidelines from institutions that develop SRs. The selected resources are organized by type of SR, and stage of development of the review (formulation of the research question, development of the protocol, literature search, risk of bias assessment, synthesis of findings, assessment of the quality of evidence, and report of SR results and conclusions). Results: Although the different types of SRs are developed following the same steps, each SR type requires specific methods, differing in characteristics and complexity. The extent of methodological development varies by type of SR, with more solid guidelines available for diagnostic accuracy and effects of interventions SRs. This methodological toolkit describes the most up-to-date risk of bias instruments: Quality in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool and Prediction model study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) for prognostic SRs, Quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies tool (QUADAS-2) for diagnostic accuracy SRs, Cochrane risk of bias tool (ROB-2) and Risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions studies tool (ROBINS-I) for effects of interventions SRs, as well as the latest developments on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Conclusions: This structured compilation of the best methodological resources for each type of SR may prove to be a very useful tool for those researchers that wish to develop SRs or conduct methodological research works on SRs.

Keywords: Systematic reviews; diagnostic accuracy; efficacy of interventions; prevalence; prognostic.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Bias
Research Design*
Software*
Systematic Reviews as Topic*

Grants and funding

Roqué M is supported by the Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP) as part of a Training Programme call for “Internal mobility: Internships in CIBERESP groups”, within the framework of the subprogramme 7.4 “Methodology, clinical records and scientific dissemination.” Martínez-García L has a Miguel Servet contract from the Institute of Health Carlos III [CP18/00007].