Umbrella reviews: A new tool to synthesize scientific evidence in surgery

被引:12
作者
Slim, K. [1 ]
Marquillier, T. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] CHU Clermont Ferrand, Digest Surg Dept, Pl Lucie Aubrac, F-63003 Clermont Ferrand, France
[2] Univ Lille, Pediat Dent, CHU Lille, F-59000 Lille, France
[3] Sorbonne Paris Nord Univ, Hlth Educ & Practices Lab, LEPS UR 3412, F-93017 Bobigny, France
关键词
Meta-analysis; Umbrella review; Methodology; Clinical research; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; CONDUCTING OVERVIEWS; QUALITY; METAANALYSES; AMSTAR;
D O I
10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2021.10.001
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Summary Researchers and practitioners are faced with an exponential increase in the number of systematic reviews (SRs) (with or without meta-analysis), a so-called 'secondary' research method that synthesizes data from primary research. This growing number, sometimes with discordant results on the same subject or with non-conclusions, has led to the introduction of the concept of reviews to synthesize SR in order to combine scientific knowledge useful to practitioners. These so-called "umbrella reviews" (UR) constitute a new tertiary research tool. Surgical research is no exception to this development but umbrella surgical reviews remain relatively rare. Any UR must be transparent and meet rigorous methodological criteria. The UR could thus provide answers to practical questions in the field of surgery, but only on condition that the bias of the included SRs is limited. Let us not forget that the base requirement of clinical surgical research remains the good methodological quality of clinical studies (primary research). Only thus can SRs or URs (secondary or tertiary research) be more useful and decisive. (c) 2021 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:144 / 149
页数:6
相关论文
共 33 条
  • [1] Quality of Conduct and Reporting of Meta-analyses of Surgical Interventions
    Adie, Sam
    Ma, David
    Harris, Ian A.
    Naylor, Justine M.
    Craig, Jonathan C.
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2015, 261 (04) : 685 - 694
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2008, US
  • [3] Summarizing systematic reviews: methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach
    Aromataris, Edoardo
    Fernandez, Ritin
    Godfrey, Christina M.
    Holly, Cheryl
    Khalil, Hanan
    Tungpunkom, Patraporn
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED HEALTHCARE, 2015, 13 (03) : 132 - 140
  • [4] Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up?
    Bastian, Hilda
    Glasziou, Paul
    Chalmers, Iain
    [J]. PLOS MEDICINE, 2010, 7 (09):
  • [5] Biondi Zoccai G, US
  • [6] Methods for depicting overlap in overviews of systematic reviews: An introduction to static tabular and graphical displays
    Bougioukas, Konstantinos I.
    Vounzoulaki, Elpida
    Mantsiou, Chrysanthi D.
    Savvides, Eliophotos D.
    Karakosta, Christina
    Diakonidis, Theodoros
    Tsapas, Apostolos
    Haidich, Anna-Bettina
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2021, 132 : 34 - 45
  • [7] Longitudinal analysis of reporting and quality of systematic reviews in high-impact surgical journals
    Chapman, S. J.
    Drake, T. M.
    Bolton, W. S.
    Barnard, J.
    Bhangu, A.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2017, 104 (03) : 198 - 204
  • [8] Performance of Harmonic devices in surgical oncology: an umbrella review of the evidence
    Cheng, Hang
    Clymer, Jeffrey W.
    Sadeghirad, Behnam
    Ferko, Nicole C.
    Cameron, Chris G.
    Amaral, Joseph F.
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 16
  • [9] cochrane, CHAPTER PDFS THE COC
  • [10] Enhanced recovery after elective caesarean: a rapid review of clinical protocols, and an umbrella review of systematic reviews
    Corso, Ellena
    Hind, Daniel
    Beever, Daniel
    Fuller, Gordon
    Wilson, Matthew J.
    Wrench, Ian J.
    Chambers, Duncan
    [J]. BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH, 2017, 17