Opheim Elin, Andersen Per Normann, Jakobsen Marianne, Aasen Bjørn, Kvaal Kari
Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Elverum, Norway.
Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies, Oslo, Norway.
Front Psychol. 2019 Jul 9;10:1558. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01558. eCollection 2019.
Different user groups regard systematic reviews as reliable and valuable sources for answering research questions. For systematic reviews to fulfill their purpose, methodological quality in all stages are of importance. The studies identified in a systematic search form the basis of the review, thus the search process methodology is important for both performing and reporting the search. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the quality of non-Cochrane systematic reviews by analyzing how they perform and report the search. This is exemplified by systematic reviews on eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR), a trauma-focused therapy commonly used for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). We examined the method chapters of 20 systematic reviews on the subject, and rated their searches and reporting using relevant elements from the Cochrane Handbook and PRISMA. We found inadequacies in the methods employed for searching and reporting the search strategy, which could have been avoided by greater adherence to guiding documents for performing systematic reviews. Our findings raise important questions for future debate on the risk of omitting studies, thus impairing the conclusions in a systematic review. For clinical purposes, researchers should investigate if, and how, the search strategy in a systematic review affects the body of knowledge and the results.
不同用户群体认为系统评价是回答研究问题的可靠且有价值的来源。为使系统评价实现其目的，所有阶段的方法学质量都很重要。在系统检索中识别出的研究构成了综述的基础，因此检索过程方法学对于进行检索和报告检索情况都很重要。本研究的目的是通过分析非Cochrane系统评价如何进行检索和报告检索情况来评估其质量。以眼动脱敏再处理疗法（EMDR）的系统评价为例，EMDR是一种常用于创伤后应激障碍（PTSD）的以创伤为重点的疗法。我们检查了20篇关于该主题的系统评价的方法章节，并使用Cochrane手册和PRISMA中的相关要素对其检索和报告进行评分。我们发现，在检索和报告检索策略所采用的方法中存在不足之处，而通过更多地遵循系统评价实施的指导文件本可避免这些不足。我们的研究结果引发了关于遗漏研究风险的重要问题，从而影响系统评价中的结论，以供未来辩论。出于临床目的，研究人员应调查系统评价中的检索策略是否以及如何影响知识体系和结果。
