Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews

Area of Science:

• Medical Informatics
• Evidence-Based Medicine
• Scientific Publishing

Background:

• Numerous systematic reviews suffer from methodological flaws, bias, and lack of informativeness.
• Despite advancements in empirical methods and appraisal tools, consistent application by authors and adherence by editors remain suboptimal.
• Clinicians often lack awareness of these issues, potentially leading to unquestioning acceptance of flawed evidence syntheses and guidelines.

Purpose of the Study:

• To distill complex information on evidence synthesis methods and tools into an accessible format for authors, peer reviewers, and editors.
• To promote a deeper understanding and appreciation of the science of evidence synthesis among all stakeholders.
• To address well-documented deficiencies in key components of evidence syntheses and elucidate the rationale for current standards.

Main Methods:

• Distinguishing between tools for assessing reporting, risk of bias, and methodological quality versus those for determining overall evidence certainty.
• Differentiating tools used by authors during synthesis development from those used for external evaluation.
• Describing exemplar methods, research practices, and novel pragmatic strategies, including preferred terminology and a scheme for characterizing research evidence types.

Main Results:

• A Concise Guide organizing best practice resources for routine implementation by authors and journals has been developed.
• The guide clarifies the intended use and limitations of various methods and tools for evidence synthesis.
• Emphasis is placed on the rationale behind best practices to encourage informed application and discourage superficial use.

Conclusions:

• The developed guidance aims to improve the quality and reliability of systematic reviews and evidence syntheses.
• Promoting understanding and appropriate use of best practices can mitigate flaws and enhance the trustworthiness of synthesized evidence.
• This initiative encourages the continued evolution of methods and tools to advance the field of evidence synthesis.