Departamento de Apoyo en Rehabilitación Cardiopulmonar Integral, Instituto Nacional del Tórax, Santiago, Chile.
Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, Faculty of Rehabilitation Sciences, Universidad Andres Bello, Santiago 7591538, Chile.
BMJ Open. 2023 Jul 20;13(7):e074615. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074615.
Several systematic reviews (SRs) have been conducted to determine the effectiveness of early mobilisation in critically ill adults with heterogeneous methodology and results. Redundancy in conducting SRs, unclear justification when leading new SRs or updating, and discordant results of SRs on the same research question may generate research waste that makes it difficult for clinicians to keep up to date with the best available evidence. This meta-research aims to assess the redundancy, methodological and reporting quality, and potential reasons for discordance in the results reported by SRs conducted to determine the effectiveness of early mobilisation in critically ill adult patients.
A meta-research of early mobilisation SRs in critically ill adult patients will be conducted. A search of MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos and other search resources will be conducted. Two independent reviewers will perform study selection, data extraction and quality appraisal. Discrepancies will be resolved by consensus or a third reviewer. The redundancy of SRs will be assessed by the degree of overlap of primary studies. In addition, the justification for conducting new SRs will be evaluated with the 'Evidence-Based Research' framework. The methodological quality of the SRs will be assessed with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 tool, and the quality of the reports through compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. To assess the potential reasons for discordance in the results of the SRs considering divergence in results and their interpretation.
As meta-research, this study does not involve the participation of people whose rights may be violated. However, this overview will be developed rigorously and systematically to achieve valid and reliable results. The findings of this meta-research study will be presented at conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal related to rehabilitation, critical care or research methodology.
osf.io/kxwq9.
有几项系统评价（SRs）已经针对不同方法和结果的危重病成人早期活动的效果进行了研究。进行 SR 存在重复性，如果在开展新的 SR 或更新时没有明确的理由，或者针对同一研究问题的 SR 结果不一致，可能会导致研究浪费，使临床医生难以跟上最佳现有证据的步伐。这项元研究旨在评估针对危重病成年患者早期活动效果的 SR 中是否存在重复性、方法学和报告质量问题，以及报告结果不一致的潜在原因。
将对危重病成年患者早期活动的 SR 进行元研究。将在 MEDLINE（Ovid）、Embase（Ovid）、CINAHL（EBSCOhost）、Cochrane 图书馆、Epistemonikos 和其他搜索资源中进行搜索。两名独立的评审员将进行研究选择、数据提取和质量评估。如有分歧，将通过协商或第三名评审员解决。SR 的重复性将通过主要研究的重叠程度来评估。此外，将使用“循证研究”框架评估开展新的 SR 的理由。SR 的方法学质量将使用 A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2 工具进行评估，报告质量将通过遵守系统评价和荟萃分析报告的首选项目进行评估。为了评估 SR 结果不一致的潜在原因，将考虑结果的差异及其解释。
作为元研究，本研究不涉及可能侵犯其权利的人的参与。但是，本综述将严格和系统地进行开发，以实现有效和可靠的结果。这项元研究的结果将在会议上展示，并发表在与康复、危重病或研究方法学相关的同行评议期刊上。
osf.io/kxwq9。
