Assessing and presenting summaries of evidence in Cochrane Reviews.

被引:182
作者
Langendam M.W. [1 ]
Akl E.A. [1 ]
Dahm P. [1 ]
Glasziou P. [1 ]
Guyatt G. [1 ]
Schünemann H.J. [1 ]
机构
[1] The Dutch Cochrane Centre, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam
关键词
Cochrane Review; Minimal Important Difference; Review Author; Compression Stocking; Airline Passenger;
D O I
10.1186/2046-4053-2-81
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Cochrane Reviews are intended to help providers, practitioners and patients make informed decisions about health care. The goal of the Cochrane Applicability and Recommendation Methods Group (ARMG) is to develop approaches, strategies and guidance that facilitate the uptake of information from Cochrane Reviews and their use by a wide audience with specific focus on developers of recommendations and on healthcare decision makers. This paper is part of a series highlighting developments in systematic review methodology in the 20 years since the establishment of The Cochrane Collaboration, and its aim is to present current work and highlight future developments in assessing and presenting summaries of evidence, with special focus on Summary of Findings (SoF) tables and Plain Language Summaries.A SoF table provides a concise and transparent summary of the key findings of a review in a tabular format. Several studies have shown that SoF tables improve accessibility and understanding of Cochrane Reviews.The ARMG and GRADE Working Group are working on further development of the SoF tables, for example by evaluating the degree of acceptable flexibility beyond standard presentation of SoF tables, developing SoF tables for diagnostic test accuracy reviews and interactive SoF tables (iSoF).The plain language summary (PLS) is the other main building block for dissemination of review results to end-users. The PLS aims to summarize the results of a review in such a way that health care consumers can readily understand them. Current efforts include the development of a standardized language to describe statistical results, based on effect size and quality of supporting evidence.Producing high quality PLS and SoF tables and making them compatible and linked would make it easier to produce dissemination products targeting different audiences (for example, providers, health policy makers, guideline developers).Current issues of debate include optimal presentation formats of SoF tables, the training required to produce SoF tables, and the extent to which the authors of Cochrane Reviews should provide explicit guidance to target audiences of patients, clinicians and policy-makers.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 132 条
[1]  
Glasziou PP(1995)An evidence based approach to individualising treatment BMJ 311 1356-1359
[2]  
Irwig LM(2010)Summary-of-findings tables in Cochrane reviews improved understanding and rapid retrieval of key information J Clin Epidemiol 63 620-626
[3]  
Rosenbaum SE(2010)User testing and stakeholder feedback contributed to the development of understandable and useful summary of findings tables for Cochrane Reviews J Clin Epidemiol 63 607-619
[4]  
Glenton C(2010)Presenting the results of Cochrane Systematic Reviews to a consumer audience: a qualitative study Med Decis Making 30 566-577
[5]  
Oxman AD(2012)Routine heparin for patients with cancer? One answer, more questions N Engl J Med 366 661-662
[6]  
Rosenbaum SE(2011)GRADE guidelines: 1 introduction - GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables J Clin Epidemiol 64 383-394
[7]  
Glenton C(2004)Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations BMJ 328 1490-998
[8]  
Nylund HK(2008)What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ 336 995-172
[9]  
Oxman AD(2013)GRADE guidelines: 12. Preparing summary of findings tables-binary outcomes J Clin Epidemiol 66 158-744
[10]  
Glenton C(2003)Simple tools for understanding risks: from innumeracy to insight BMJ 327 741-755