Viswanathan Meera, McPheeters Melissa L, Murad M Hassan, Butler Mary E, Devine Emily E Beth, Dyson Michele P, Guise Jeanne-Marie, Kahwati Leila C, Miles Jeremy N V, Morton Sally C
RTI International, 3040 East Cornwallis Road, Durham, NC 27709, USA.
Vanderbilt University, 2525 West End Avenue, Nashville, TN 37203-1738, USA.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Oct;90:28-36. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.014. Epub 2017 Jul 15.
Systematic reviews of complex interventions can vary widely in purpose, data availability and heterogeneity, and stakeholder expectations.
This article addresses the uncertainty that systematic reviewers face in selecting methods for reviews of complex interventions. Specifically, it lays out parameters for systematic reviewers to consider when selecting analytic approaches that best answer the questions at hand and suggests analytic techniques that may be appropriate in different circumstances.
Systematic reviews of complex interventions comprising multiple questions may use multiple analytic approaches. Parameters to consider when choosing analytic methods for complex interventions include nature and timing of the decision (clinical practice guideline, policy, or other); purpose of the review; extent of existing evidence; logistic factors such as the timeline, process, and resources for deciding the scope of the review; and value of information to be obtained from choosing specific systematic review methods. Reviewers may elect to revise their analytic approach based on new or changing considerations during the course of the review but should guard against bias through transparency of reporting.
对复杂干预措施的系统评价在目的、数据可用性与异质性以及利益相关者期望方面可能存在很大差异。
本文探讨了系统评价者在为复杂干预措施的评价选择方法时所面临的不确定性。具体而言,它为系统评价者在选择最能回答手头问题的分析方法时应考虑的参数进行了阐述,并提出了在不同情况下可能适用的分析技术。
包含多个问题的复杂干预措施的系统评价可能会使用多种分析方法。为复杂干预措施选择分析方法时要考虑的参数包括决策的性质和时机(临床实践指南、政策或其他);评价的目的;现有证据的程度;后勤因素,如决定评价范围的时间线、过程和资源;以及从选择特定系统评价方法中获得的信息价值。评价者在评价过程中可能会根据新的或不断变化的考虑因素选择修改其分析方法,但应通过报告的透明度来防止偏差。