Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital

Systematic Reviews are Rarely Used to Inform Study Design - a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

  • Birgitte Nørgaard
  • Eva Draborg
  • Jane Andreasen
  • Carsten Bogh Juhl
  • Jennifer Yost
  • Klara Brunnhuber
  • Karen A Robinson
  • Hans Lund
Vis graf over relationer

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to identify and synthesize the results from meta-research studies to determine whether and how authors of original studies in clinical health research use systematic reviews when designing new studies.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: For this systematic review, we searched MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID) and the Cochrane Methodology Register. We included meta-research studies and primary outcome was the percentage of original studies using systematic reviews to design their study. Risk of bias was assessed using an ad hoc created list of ten items. The results are presented both as a narrative synthesis and a meta-analysis.

RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included. The use of a systematic review to inform the design of new clinical studies varied between 0% and 73%, with a mean percentage of 17%. The number of components of the design in which information from previous systematic reviews was used varied from three to 11.

CONCLUSION: Clinical health research is characterized by variability regarding the extent to which systematic reviews are used to guide the design. An evidence-based research (EBR) approach towards research design when new clinical health studies are designed is necessary to decrease potential research redundancy and increase end-user value.

TidsskriftJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Sider (fra-til)1-13
Antal sider13
StatusUdgivet - maj 2022

Bibliografisk note

Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.

ID: 72886876