Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center methods provide guidance on prioritization and selection of harms in systematic reviews

被引：35

作者：

Chou, Roger ^{[1
]}

Baker, William L. ^{[2
]}

Banez, Lionel L. ^{[3
]}

Iyer, Suchitra ^{[3
]}

Myers, Evan R. ^{[4
]}

Newberry, Sydne ^{[5
]}

Pincock, Laura ^{[3
]}

Robinson, Karen A. ^{[6
]}

Sardenga, Lyndzie ^{[7
]}

Sathe, Nila ^{[8
]}

Springs, Stacey ^{[9
]}

Wilt, Timothy J. ^{[10
]}

机构：

[1] Pacific Northwest Evidence Based Practice Ctr, Portland, OR 97239 USA

[2] Univ Connecticut, Evidence Based Practice Ctr, Storrs, CT 06269 USA

[3] Agcy Healthcare Res & Qual, Rockville, MD 20857 USA

[4] Duke Univ, Evidence Based Practice Ctr, Durham, NC 27705 USA

[5] RAND Southern Calif Evidence Based Practice Ctr, Santa Monica, CA 90407 USA

[6] Johns Hopkins Univ, Evidence Based Practice Ctr, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA

[7] Sci Resource Ctr, Portland, OR 97239 USA

[8] Vanderbilt Univ, Evidence Based Practice Ctr, Nashville, TN 37203 USA

[9] Brown Univ, Evidence Based Practice Ctr, Providence, RI 02912 USA

[10] Minnesota Evidence Based Practice Ctr, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA

来源：

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY | 2018年 / 98卷

基金：

美国医疗保健研究与质量局;

关键词：

Harms; Systematic reviews; Comparative effectiveness review; Study methodology; Recommendations; Adverse effects;

D O I：

10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.01.007

中图分类号：

R19 [保健组织与事业（卫生事业管理）];

学科分类号：

摘要：

Objectives: Systematic reviews should provide balanced assessments of benefits and harms, while focusing on the most important outcomes. Selection of harms to be reviewed can be a challenge due to the potential for large numbers of diverse harms. Study Design and Setting: A workgroup of methodologists from Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPCs) developed consensus-based guidance on selection and prioritization of harms in systematic reviews. Recommendations were informed by a literature scan, review of Evidence-based Practice Center reports, and interviews with experts in conducting reviews or assessing harms and persons representing organizations that commission or use systematic reviews. Results: Ten recommendations were developed on selection and prioritization of harms, including routinely focusing on serious as well as less serious but frequent or bothersome harms; routinely engaging stakeholders and using literature searches and other data sources to identify important harms; using a prioritization process (formal or less formal) to inform selection decisions; and describing the methods used to select and prioritize harms. Conclusion: We provide preliminary guidance for a more structured approach to selection and prioritization of harms in systematic reviews. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

引用

页码：98 / 104

页数：7

共 17 条

[1]

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, AHRQ SEC SIT METH AR

[2] Evaluating drug effects in the post-Vioxx world there must be a better way [J].

Avorn, J .

CIRCULATION, 2006, 113 (18) :2173-2176

[3] Challenges in systematic reviews that assess treatment harms [J].

Chou, R ;

Helfand, M .

ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2005, 142 (12) :1090-1099

[4] AHRQ Series Paper 4: Assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health-Care Program [J].

Chou, Roger ;

Aronson, Naomi ;

Atkins, David ;

Ismaila, Afisi S. ;

Santaguida, Pasqualina ;

Smith, David H. ;

Whitlock, Evelyn ;

Wilt, Timothy J. ;

Moher, David .

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2010, 63 (05) :502-512

[5]

Craigle V., 2007, J Med Libr Assoc, V95, P224, DOI [10.3163/1536-5050.95.2.224, DOI 10.3163/1536-5050.95.2.224]

[6] Secondary prevention of macrovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes in the PROactive Study (PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial In macroVascular Events):: a randomised controlled trial [J].

Dormandy, JA ;

Charbonnel, B ;

Eckland, DJA ;

Erdmann, E ;

Massi-Benedetti, M ;

Kmoules, IK ;

Skene, AM ;

Tan, MH ;

Lefébvre, PJ ;

Murray, GD ;

Standl, E ;

Wilcox, RG ;

Wlhelmsen, L ;

Betteridge, J ;

Birkeland, K ;

Golay, A ;

Heine, RJ ;

Korányi, L ;

Laakso, M ;

Mokán, M ;

Norkus, A ;

Pirags, V ;

Podar, T ;

Scheen, A ;

Scherbaum, W ;

Schernthaner, G ;

Schmitz, O ;

Skrha, J ;

Smith, U ;

Taton, J .

LANCET, 2005, 366 (9493) :1279-1289

[7]

Garces J.P.D., 2012, ELICITING PATIENT PE

[8]

Gibbons R D., 2015, Statistical methods for drug safety

[9] GRADE guidelines: 12. Preparing Summary of Findings tables-binary outcomes [J].

Guyatt, Gordon H. ;

Oxman, Andrew D. ;

Santesso, Nancy ;

Helfand, Mark ;

Vist, Gunn ;

Kunz, Regina ;

Brozek, Jan ;

Norris, Susan ;

Meerpohl, Joerg ;

Djulbegovic, Ben ;

Alonso-Coello, Pablo ;

Post, Piet N. ;

Busse, Jason W. ;

Glasziou, Paul ;

Christensen, Robin ;

Schuenemann, Holger J. .

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2013, 66 (02) :158-172

[10] GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes [J].

Guyatt, Gordon H. ;

Oxman, Andrew D. ;

Kunz, Regina ;

Atkins, David ;

Brozek, Jan ;

Vist, Gunn ;

Alderson, Philip ;

Glasziou, Paul ;

Falck-Ytter, Yngve ;

Schuenemann, Holger J. .

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2011, 64 (04) :395-400

← 1 2 →