Living systematic reviews in rehabilitation science can improve evidence-based healthcare

被引:0
作者
S. Elbers
H. Wittink
U. Kaiser
J. Kleijnen
J. Pool
A. Köke
R. Smeets
机构
[1] University of Applied Sciences Utrecht,Research group Lifestyle & Health, Research Centre Healthy and Sustainable Living
[2] Maastricht University,Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Research School CAPHRI, Faculty of Health, Life Sciences and Medicine
[3] Medical Faculty Technical University Dresden,Comprehensive Pain Center
[4] University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden,Department of Family Medicine, Research School CAPHRI, Faculty of Health, Life Sciences and Medicine
[5] Maastricht University,undefined
[6] Centre of Expertise in Pain and Rehabilitation,undefined
[7] South University of Applied Sciences Heerlen,undefined
[8] CIR Revalidatie,undefined
[9] location Eindhoven,undefined
[10] Pain in Motion International Research Group (PiM),undefined
来源
Systematic Reviews | / 10卷
关键词
Systematic review; Living systematic review; Rehabilitation; Chronic pain; Methods; Meta-analysis;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Although systematic reviews are considered as central components in evidence-based practice, they currently face an important challenge to keep up with the exponential publication rate of clinical trials. After initial publication, only a minority of the systematic reviews are updated, and it often takes multiple years before these results become accessible. Consequently, many systematic reviews are not up to date, thereby increasing the time-gap between research findings and clinical practice. A potential solution is offered by a living systematic reviews approach. These types of studies are characterized by a workflow of continuous updates which decreases the time it takes to disseminate new findings. Although living systematic reviews are specifically designed to continuously synthesize new evidence in rapidly emerging topics, they have also considerable potential in slower developing domains, such as rehabilitation science. In this commentary, we outline the rationale and required steps to transition a regular systematic review into a living systematic review. We also propose a workflow that is designed for rehabilitation science.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] The move towards living systematic reviews and living guidelines in healthcare: consideration of the possibilities and challenges for living qualitative evidence syntheses
    Carmona, Chris
    Carroll, Christopher
    Baxter, Susan
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2023, 12 (01)
  • [22] Evidence-based practice of Chinese medicine in physical rehabilitation science
    Arthur de Sá Ferreira
    Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine, 2013, 19 : 723 - 729
  • [23] The move towards living systematic reviews and living guidelines in healthcare: consideration of the possibilities and challenges for living qualitative evidence syntheses
    Chris Carmona
    Christopher Carroll
    Susan Baxter
    Systematic Reviews, 12
  • [24] Role of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis in Evidence-based Medicine
    Stefan Sauerland
    Christoph M. Seiler
    World Journal of Surgery, 2005, 29 : 582 - 587
  • [25] Evidence-Based Podiatric Medicine Importance of Systematic Reviews in Clinical Practice
    Hawke, Fiona
    Burns, Joshua
    Landorf, Karl B.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN PODIATRIC MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2009, 99 (03) : 260 - 266
  • [26] Evidence-based interventions to reduce adverse events in hospitals: a systematic review of systematic reviews
    Zegers, Marieke
    Hesselink, Gijs
    Geense, Wytske
    Vincent, Charles
    Wollersheim, Hub
    BMJ OPEN, 2016, 6 (09):
  • [27] Evidence-based medicine and systematic reviews in perioperative medicine -: Fad or necessity?
    Walder, B
    Tramèr, MR
    ANAESTHESIST, 2001, 50 (09): : 689 - 694
  • [28] Evidence-based practice: how to perform and use systematic reviews for clinical decision-making
    Kranke, Peter
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2010, 27 (09) : 763 - 772
  • [29] Evidence-based or biased? The quality of published reviews of evidence-based practices
    Littell, Julia H.
    CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES REVIEW, 2008, 30 (11) : 1299 - 1317
  • [30] Can prospective systematic reviews of animal studies improve clinical translation?
    Pound, Pandora
    Ritskes-Hoitinga, Merel
    JOURNAL OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE, 2020, 18 (01)