Journal of clinical epidemiology
-
Systematic reviews (SRs) are time and resource intensive, requiring approximately 1 year from protocol registration to submission for publication. Our aim was to describe the process, facilitators, and barriers to completing the first 2-week full SR. ⋯ A small and experienced systematic reviewer team using Systematic Review Automation tools who have protected time to focus solely on the SR can complete a moderately sized SR in 2 weeks.
-
To determine the accuracy of single-reviewer screening in correctly classifying abstracts as relevant or irrelevant for literature reviews. ⋯ Single-reviewer abstract screening does not appear to fulfill the high methodological standards that decisionmakers expect from systematic reviews. It may be a viable option for rapid reviews, which deliberately lower methodological standards to provide decision makers with accelerated evidence synthesis products.
-
The objective of this study was to provide guidance on the use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to determine certainty in estimates of association between prognostic factors and future outcomes. ⋯ The same principles GRADE proposed for bodies of evidence addressing treatment and overall prognosis work well in assessing individual prognostic factors, both in noncontextualized and contextualized settings.
-
The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) system for assessing certainty in a body of evidence currently uses two levels, serious and very serious, for downgrading on a single domain. In the context of newer risk of bias instruments, such as Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies I (ROBINS-I), evidence generated by nonrandomized studies may justify rating down by more than two levels on a single domain. Given the importance users of GRADE assign to terminology, our objective was to assess what term GRADE stakeholders would prefer for rating down certainty by three levels. ⋯ Based on this stakeholder-driven study, "extremely serious" is the preferred term to rate down certainty of evidence by three levels in the GRADE approach.
-
Multicenter Study
The trials within cohorts design facilitated efficient patient enrollment and generalizability in oncology setting.
The trials within cohorts (TwiCs) design aims to improve recruitment efficiency. We conducted the first TwiCs in radiation oncology and described efficiency of the design and generalizability of the results. ⋯ The TwiCs design is feasible, allows enrollment of a high proportion of randomizable patients, with positive impact on trial efficiency and generalizability of results in a clinical oncology setting.