Cochrane's COVID-19 Living Systematic Reviews: A Mixed-Methods Study of Their Conduct, Reporting and Currency

Kevindu De Silva, Tari Turner, Steve McDonald
{"title":"Cochrane's COVID-19 Living Systematic Reviews: A Mixed-Methods Study of Their Conduct, Reporting and Currency","authors":"Kevindu De Silva,&nbsp;Tari Turner,&nbsp;Steve McDonald","doi":"10.1002/cesm.70024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Living systematic reviews (LSRs) should provide up-to-date evidence for priority questions where the evidence may be uncertain and fast-moving. LSRs featured prominently during COVID-19 and formed part of Cochrane's response to the pandemic. We conducted a mixed-methods study to describe the characteristics of Cochrane's COVID-19 living reviews, determine the currency of the included evidence, and evaluate authors' experiences in conducting and publishing these reviews.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We identified living reviews of COVID-19 from the <i>Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews</i> and extracted data on the number of versions published and publication timelines. We assessed the currency of evidence by comparing studies included in the reviews against a comprehensive list of studies maintained for the Australian living guidelines for COVID-19. The qualitative component involved semi-structured interviews with review authors to identify the barriers and enablers to conducting, reporting and publishing living reviews.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>Cochrane published 25 COVID-19 living systematic reviews. Half of these reviews had not been updated when assessed in June 2023 and only four had been updated more than once. A total of 118 studies were included in the living reviews. We estimated that an additional 119 studies were available and potentially relevant for inclusion. Interviews with six authors indicated that publication timelines were reduced by editorial delays, loss of funding, waning commitment, and the burden of screening search results. An inability to communicate the living status of reviews in the Cochrane Library was a common frustration for many authors. Although authors felt the conclusions of their reviews were still current, only one living review communicated its updated status and made new evidence accessible after the review was published.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Maintaining and communicating the currency of Cochrane's COVID-19 living systematic reviews was not feasible for many author teams because of author-side, editorial and platform barriers.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100286,"journal":{"name":"Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods","volume":"3 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cesm.70024","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cesm.70024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Living systematic reviews (LSRs) should provide up-to-date evidence for priority questions where the evidence may be uncertain and fast-moving. LSRs featured prominently during COVID-19 and formed part of Cochrane's response to the pandemic. We conducted a mixed-methods study to describe the characteristics of Cochrane's COVID-19 living reviews, determine the currency of the included evidence, and evaluate authors' experiences in conducting and publishing these reviews.

Methods

We identified living reviews of COVID-19 from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and extracted data on the number of versions published and publication timelines. We assessed the currency of evidence by comparing studies included in the reviews against a comprehensive list of studies maintained for the Australian living guidelines for COVID-19. The qualitative component involved semi-structured interviews with review authors to identify the barriers and enablers to conducting, reporting and publishing living reviews.

Findings

Cochrane published 25 COVID-19 living systematic reviews. Half of these reviews had not been updated when assessed in June 2023 and only four had been updated more than once. A total of 118 studies were included in the living reviews. We estimated that an additional 119 studies were available and potentially relevant for inclusion. Interviews with six authors indicated that publication timelines were reduced by editorial delays, loss of funding, waning commitment, and the burden of screening search results. An inability to communicate the living status of reviews in the Cochrane Library was a common frustration for many authors. Although authors felt the conclusions of their reviews were still current, only one living review communicated its updated status and made new evidence accessible after the review was published.

Conclusions

Maintaining and communicating the currency of Cochrane's COVID-19 living systematic reviews was not feasible for many author teams because of author-side, editorial and platform barriers.

Cochrane的COVID-19活体系统评价:对其行为、报告和使用的混合方法研究
动态系统评价(lrs)应该为证据不确定和快速变化的优先问题提供最新的证据。lrs在COVID-19期间发挥了重要作用,并成为科克伦应对大流行的一部分。我们进行了一项混合方法研究,以描述Cochrane的COVID-19活综述的特征,确定纳入证据的有效性,并评估作者在进行和发表这些综述方面的经验。方法从Cochrane系统综述数据库中筛选COVID-19活综述,提取发表版本数和发表时间线数据。我们通过将综述中纳入的研究与为澳大利亚COVID-19生活指南保留的综合研究清单进行比较,评估了证据的有效性。定性部分包括与综述作者的半结构化访谈,以确定进行、报告和发布动态综述的障碍和推动因素。Cochrane发表了25篇COVID-19活系统综述。在2023年6月评估时,这些审查中有一半没有更新,只有四个更新了一次以上。活体综述共纳入118项研究。我们估计还有119项研究是可用的,并且可能与纳入相关。对六位作者的采访表明,由于编辑延误、资金损失、承诺减弱和筛选搜索结果的负担,出版时间被缩短了。对于许多作者来说,无法与Cochrane图书馆的评论进行交流是一个常见的挫折。尽管作者认为他们的综述结论仍然是最新的,但在综述发表后,只有一篇活的综述传达了其更新状态,并提供了新的证据。由于作者方、编辑和平台的障碍,对许多作者团队来说,维持和传播Cochrane的COVID-19活系统评价的流通是不可行的。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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