Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Using existing systematic reviews in complex systematic reviews.

Evelyn P Whitlock1, Jennifer S Lin, Roger Chou

  • 1Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center, Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, and Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon 97227, USA. evelyn.whitlock@kpchr.org

Annals of Internal Medicine
|May 21, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Antimicrobial peptoids pass rapidly through bacterial membranes and flocculate ribosomes and DNA: A single-cell fluorescence study.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2026
Same author

Frameworks to identify research gaps, frame research needs, and derive research priorities from evidence syntheses: a scoping review.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same author

Human cathelicidin peptide LL-37 compacts nucleic acids and alters neutrophil extracellular trap structure.

Scientific reports·2026
Same author

Peptoid-based antimicrobial strategies against polymyxin-resistant Gram-negative bacteria.

Journal of applied microbiology·2026
Same author

History of evidence-based research.

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine·2026
Same author

Determining the Conclusiveness of Systematic Review Evidence : A Scoping Review of Methodological Approaches.

Annals of internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Correction to I.M. Matters News: Sleep medicine for seniors.

Annals of internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Adverse Events After Same-Day COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccination Versus Influenza Vaccination Alone : A Target Trial Emulation.

Annals of internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Leveraging Real-World Evidence to Inform Regulatory, Clinical, and Coverage Decisions Related to Glucagon-Like Peptide-1-Based Therapies: Synopsis of a National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Workshop.

Annals of internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Methodological Approaches to Real-World Evidence Generation for Glucagon-like Peptide-1-Based Therapies: Synopsis of a National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Workshop.

Annals of internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Weekly and Biweekly Treatment With Bofanglutide Versus Semaglutide in Chinese Patients With Type 2 Diabetes : A Phase 2b Randomized Clinical Trial.

Annals of internal medicine·2026
Same journal

Grappling with GLP-1 prescribing.

Annals of internal medicine·2026
See all related articles

This study provides guidance for incorporating existing systematic reviews into new reviews, addressing validity and efficiency for health policy. It outlines steps and potential pitfalls for this complex systematic review method.

Area of Science:

  • Health Sciences
  • Evidence Synthesis
  • Systematic Review Methodology

Background:

  • Systematic reviews are increasingly complex, often supporting clinical guidelines and health policy.
  • Incorporating existing systematic reviews into new reviews is an emerging but unexamined practice.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide a framework for decision-making regarding the incorporation of existing systematic reviews.
  • To identify potential hazards and best practices for this methodology.

Main Methods:

  • Authors draw on collective experience to outline steps for reviewers.
  • Key steps include locating, assessing relevance and quality of existing reviews, determining incorporation methods, and reporting.

Main Results:

Related Experiment Videos

  • A series of steps and potential hazards are enumerated for reviewers.
  • The process involves critical appraisal of existing reviews and transparent reporting.

Conclusions:

  • Further methodological specification and reporting standards are needed for incorporating existing systematic reviews.
  • This practice can be valid and efficient if conducted systematically.