Developing reporting checklist items from systematic review findings: a roadmap and lessons to be learned from ACCORD

IF 7.3 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Esther J. van Zuuren , Amy Price , Paul Blazey , Ellen L. Hughes , Zbys Fedorowicz , Patricia Logullo
{"title":"Developing reporting checklist items from systematic review findings: a roadmap and lessons to be learned from ACCORD","authors":"Esther J. van Zuuren ,&nbsp;Amy Price ,&nbsp;Paul Blazey ,&nbsp;Ellen L. Hughes ,&nbsp;Zbys Fedorowicz ,&nbsp;Patricia Logullo","doi":"10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>To demonstrate how researchers can identify and translate reporting gaps from a systematic review into checklist items for reporting guidelines.</p></div><div><h3>Study Design and Setting</h3><p>Good quality research reporting ensures transparency, reproducibility, and utility, facilitated by reporting guidelines. Conducting a systematic review is an essential step in the development of these guidelines. The Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network's toolkit (2010) assists researchers in this process and is due for an update to address current gaps and evolving research methods. One significant gap is the translation of systematic review findings into checklist items. Reflecting on our experience developing the ACcurate Consensus Reporting Document, we illustrate this translation process aiming to empower researchers developing reporting guidelines to address potential biases and promote transparency. We highlight the challenges faced and how they were addressed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The systematic review search process was iterative, involving multiple adjustments to balance precision and sensitivity. Excessively stringent exclusion criteria may lead to missed valuable insights, especially when studies offer relevant content. An information specialist was invaluable in developing the search strategy. Key lessons learned include the necessity of maintaining flexibility and openness during data extraction, continuous adaptation based on panelist feedback, and promoting clear communication through understandable language. These principles can guide the development of future reporting guidelines and the updating of the EQUATOR toolkit, promoting transparency and robustness in research reporting.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Maintaining flexibility, capturing evolving insights, clear communication, and accommodating changes in research and technologies are key to translating systematic review findings into effective reporting checklists.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","volume":"174 ","pages":"Article 111490"},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435624002464/pdfft?md5=cf5a6f5af61e4aaaac201b9d9af42598&pid=1-s2.0-S0895435624002464-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435624002464","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

To demonstrate how researchers can identify and translate reporting gaps from a systematic review into checklist items for reporting guidelines.

Study Design and Setting

Good quality research reporting ensures transparency, reproducibility, and utility, facilitated by reporting guidelines. Conducting a systematic review is an essential step in the development of these guidelines. The Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) Network's toolkit (2010) assists researchers in this process and is due for an update to address current gaps and evolving research methods. One significant gap is the translation of systematic review findings into checklist items. Reflecting on our experience developing the ACcurate Consensus Reporting Document, we illustrate this translation process aiming to empower researchers developing reporting guidelines to address potential biases and promote transparency. We highlight the challenges faced and how they were addressed.

Results

The systematic review search process was iterative, involving multiple adjustments to balance precision and sensitivity. Excessively stringent exclusion criteria may lead to missed valuable insights, especially when studies offer relevant content. An information specialist was invaluable in developing the search strategy. Key lessons learned include the necessity of maintaining flexibility and openness during data extraction, continuous adaptation based on panelist feedback, and promoting clear communication through understandable language. These principles can guide the development of future reporting guidelines and the updating of the EQUATOR toolkit, promoting transparency and robustness in research reporting.

Conclusion

Maintaining flexibility, capturing evolving insights, clear communication, and accommodating changes in research and technologies are key to translating systematic review findings into effective reporting checklists.

Abstract Image

根据系统综述结果制定报告清单项目:ACCORD 的路线图和经验教训。
目的: 展示研究人员如何将系统综述中的报告差距转化为报告指南的核对表项目:展示研究人员如何从系统综述中发现报告差距并将其转化为报告指南的核对表项目:高质量的研究报告可确保透明度、可重复性和实用性,而报告指南则为其提供了便利。开展系统综述是制定这些指南的重要步骤。EQUATOR 网络的工具包(2010 年)可在此过程中为研究人员提供帮助,该工具包应予以更新,以解决当前的差距和不断发展的研究方法。将系统综述结果转化为核对表项目是一个重要的差距。通过反思我们开发 ACcurate 共识报告文件 (ACCORD) 的经验,我们阐述了这一转化过程,旨在增强研究人员制定报告指南的能力,以解决潜在的偏见并提高透明度。我们强调了所面临的挑战以及如何应对这些挑战:结果:系统性综述的搜索过程是反复进行的,涉及多次调整以平衡精确性和敏感性。过于严格的排除标准可能会导致错过有价值的见解,尤其是当研究提供了相关内容时。信息专家在制定检索策略时发挥了重要作用。我们学到的主要经验包括:在数据提取过程中必须保持灵活性和开放性,根据专家小组成员的反馈不断调整,以及通过易懂的语言促进清晰的沟通。这些原则可以指导未来报告指南的制定和EQUATOR工具包的更新,提高研究报告的透明度和稳健性:保持灵活性、捕捉不断发展的见解、清晰的沟通以及适应研究和技术的变化是将系统综述结果转化为有效报告核对表的关键。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
6.90%
发文量
320
审稿时长
44 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Epidemiology strives to enhance the quality of clinical and patient-oriented healthcare research by advancing and applying innovative methods in conducting, presenting, synthesizing, disseminating, and translating research results into optimal clinical practice. Special emphasis is placed on training new generations of scientists and clinical practice leaders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信