When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist

doi:10.1136/bmj.i3507

. 2016 Jul 20:354:i3507.

doi: 10.1136/bmj.i3507.

When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist

Paul Garner¹, Sally Hopewell², Jackie Chandler³, Harriet MacLehose³, Holger J Schünemann⁴, Elie A Akl⁵, Joseph Beyene⁶, Stephanie Chang⁷, Rachel Churchill⁸, Karin Dearness⁹, Gordon Guyatt¹⁰, Carol Lefebvre¹¹, Beth Liles¹², Rachel Marshall³, Laura Martínez García¹³, Chris Mavergames¹⁴, Mona Nasser¹⁵, Amir Qaseem¹⁶, Margaret Sampson¹⁷, Karla Soares-Weiser³, Yemisi Takwoingi¹⁸, Lehana Thabane¹⁹, Marialena Trivella²⁰, Peter Tugwell²¹, Emma Welsh²², Ed C Wilson²³, Holger J Schünemann⁴; Panel for updating guidance for systematic reviews (PUGs)

Affiliations

¹ Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group, Department of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool L3 5QA, UK Paul.Garner@lstmed.ac.uk.
² Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
³ Cochrane Editorial Unit, Cochrane Central Executive, London, UK.
⁴ Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada Cochrane GRADEing Methods Group, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
⁵ Cochrane GRADEing Methods Group, Ottawa, ON, Canada Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
⁶ Department of Mathematics and Statistics, McMaster University.
⁷ Evidence-based Practice Center Program, Agency for Healthcare and Research Quality, Rockville, MD, USA.
⁸ Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
⁹ Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Group, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
¹⁰ Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
¹¹ Lefebvre Associates, Oxford, UK.
¹² Kaiser Permanente National Guideline Program, Portland, OR, USA.
¹³ Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Barcelona, Spain.
¹⁴ Cochrane Informatics and Knowledge Management, Cochrane Central Executive, Freiburg, Germany.
¹⁵ Plymouth University Peninsula School of Dentistry, Plymouth, UK.
¹⁶ Department of Clinical Policy, American College of Physicians,Philadelphia, PA, USA Guidelines International Network, Pitlochry, UK.
¹⁷ Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
¹⁸ Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
¹⁹ Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada Biostatistics Unit, Centre for Evaluation, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
²⁰ Centre for Statistics in Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
²¹ University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
²² Cochrane Airways Group, Population Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London, UK.
²³ Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

PMID: 27443385
PMCID: PMC4955793
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i3507

When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist

Paul Garner et al. BMJ. 2016.

. 2016 Jul 20:354:i3507.

doi: 10.1136/bmj.i3507.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group, Department of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool L3 5QA, UK Paul.Garner@lstmed.ac.uk.
² Oxford Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
³ Cochrane Editorial Unit, Cochrane Central Executive, London, UK.
⁴ Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada Cochrane GRADEing Methods Group, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
⁵ Cochrane GRADEing Methods Group, Ottawa, ON, Canada Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon.
⁶ Department of Mathematics and Statistics, McMaster University.
⁷ Evidence-based Practice Center Program, Agency for Healthcare and Research Quality, Rockville, MD, USA.
⁸ Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
⁹ Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases Group, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
¹⁰ Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
¹¹ Lefebvre Associates, Oxford, UK.
¹² Kaiser Permanente National Guideline Program, Portland, OR, USA.
¹³ Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Barcelona, Spain.
¹⁴ Cochrane Informatics and Knowledge Management, Cochrane Central Executive, Freiburg, Germany.
¹⁵ Plymouth University Peninsula School of Dentistry, Plymouth, UK.
¹⁶ Department of Clinical Policy, American College of Physicians,Philadelphia, PA, USA Guidelines International Network, Pitlochry, UK.
¹⁷ Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
¹⁸ Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
¹⁹ Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada Biostatistics Unit, Centre for Evaluation, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
²⁰ Centre for Statistics in Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
²¹ University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
²² Cochrane Airways Group, Population Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London, UK.
²³ Cambridge Centre for Health Services Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

PMID: 27443385
PMCID: PMC4955793
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i3507

Erratum in

Erratum: When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist.
[No authors listed] [No authors listed] BMJ. 2016 Sep 6;354:i4853. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i4853. BMJ. 2016. PMID: 27600762 Free PMC article.

Abstract

Updating of systematic reviews is generally more efficient than starting all over again when new evidence emerges, but to date there has been no clear guidance on how to do this. This guidance helps authors of systematic reviews, commissioners, and editors decide when to update a systematic review, and then how to go about updating the review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: All participants have a direct or indirect interest in systematic reviews and updating as part of their job or academic career. Most participants contribute to Cochrane, whose mission includes a commitment to the updating of its systematic review portfolio. JC, HM, RM, CM, KS-W, and MT are, or were at that time, employed by the Cochrane Central Executive.

Figures

None — **Fig 1** Decision framework to assess systematic reviews for updating, with standard terms to report such decisions

See this image and copyright information in PMC

Cited by

Community-level interventions for improving access to food in low- and middle-income countries.
Durao S, Visser ME, Ramokolo V, Oliveira JM, Schmidt BM, Balakrishna Y, Brand A, Kristjansson E, Schoonees A. Durao S, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jul 28;7(7):CD011504. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011504.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Aug 5;8:CD011504. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011504.pub3. PMID: 32722849 Free PMC article. Updated.
Irreproducibility in searches of scientific literature: A comparative analysis.
Pozsgai G, Lövei GL, Vasseur L, Gurr G, Batáry P, Korponai J, Littlewood NA, Liu J, Móra A, Obrycki J, Reynolds O, Stockan JA, VanVolkenburg H, Zhang J, Zhou W, You M. Pozsgai G, et al. Ecol Evol. 2021 Oct 14;11(21):14658-14668. doi: 10.1002/ece3.8154. eCollection 2021 Nov. Ecol Evol. 2021. PMID: 34765132 Free PMC article.
Complement-activating donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies in solid organ transplantation: systematic review, meta-analysis, and critical appraisal.
Al-Awadhi S, Raynaud M, Louis K, Bouquegneau A, Taupin JL, Aubert O, Loupy A, Lefaucheur C. Al-Awadhi S, et al. Front Immunol. 2023 Oct 2;14:1265796. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1265796. eCollection 2023. Front Immunol. 2023. PMID: 37849755 Free PMC article.
Prevalence of delirium, depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder among COVID-19 patients: protocol for a living systematic review.
Shi J, Gao Y, Zhao L, Li Y, Yan M, Niu MM, Chen Y, Song Z, Zhang R, Zhang L, Tian J. Shi J, et al. Syst Rev. 2020 Nov 6;9(1):258. doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01507-2. Syst Rev. 2020. PMID: 33158456 Free PMC article.
Real-world effectiveness of CDK4/6i in first-line treatment of HR+/HER2- advanced/metastatic breast cancer: updated systematic review.
Harbeck N, Brufsky A, Rose CG, Korytowsky B, Chen C, Tantakoun K, Jazexhi E, Nguyen DHV, Bartlett M, Samjoo IA, Pluard T. Harbeck N, et al. Front Oncol. 2025 Mar 10;15:1530391. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2025.1530391. eCollection 2025. Front Oncol. 2025. PMID: 40129925 Free PMC article. Review.

See all "Cited by" articles

References

1. Shekelle PG, Ortiz E, Rhodes S, et al. Validity of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality clinical practice guidelines: how quickly do guidelines become outdated?JAMA 2001;286:1461-7. 10.1001/jama.286.12.1461 pmid:11572738. - DOI - PubMed
1. Claxton K, Cohen JT, Neumann PJ. When is evidence sufficient?Health Aff (Millwood) 2005;24:93-101. 10.1377/hlthaff.24.1.93 pmid:15647219. - DOI - PubMed
1. Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M, et al. Improving the efficiency and relevance of health technology assessment: the role of decision analytic modelling. Paper 179.Centre for Health Economics, University of York, 2000.
1. Sculpher M, Claxton K. Establishing the cost-effectiveness of new pharmaceuticals under conditions of uncertainty—when is there sufficient evidence?Value Health 2005;8:433-46. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00033.x pmid:16091019. - DOI - PubMed
1. Sculpher M, Drummond M, Buxton M. The iterative use of economic evaluation as part of the process of health technology assessment. J Health Serv Res Policy 1997;2:26-30.pmid:10180650. - PubMed

MeSH terms

Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions

Grants and funding

16895/CRUK_/Cancer Research UK/United Kingdom

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
- scite Smart Citations

[1] Shekelle PG, Ortiz E, Rhodes S, et al. Validity of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality clinical practice guidelines: how quickly do guidelines become outdated?JAMA 2001;286:1461-7. 10.1001/jama.286.12.1461 pmid:11572738. - DOI - PubMed

[2] Shekelle PG, Ortiz E, Rhodes S, et al. Validity of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality clinical practice guidelines: how quickly do guidelines become outdated?JAMA 2001;286:1461-7. 10.1001/jama.286.12.1461 pmid:11572738. - DOI - PubMed

[3] Claxton K, Cohen JT, Neumann PJ. When is evidence sufficient?Health Aff (Millwood) 2005;24:93-101. 10.1377/hlthaff.24.1.93 pmid:15647219. - DOI - PubMed

[4] Claxton K, Cohen JT, Neumann PJ. When is evidence sufficient?Health Aff (Millwood) 2005;24:93-101. 10.1377/hlthaff.24.1.93 pmid:15647219. - DOI - PubMed

[5] Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M, et al. Improving the efficiency and relevance of health technology assessment: the role of decision analytic modelling. Paper 179.Centre for Health Economics, University of York, 2000.

[6] Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M, et al. Improving the efficiency and relevance of health technology assessment: the role of decision analytic modelling. Paper 179.Centre for Health Economics, University of York, 2000.

[7] Sculpher M, Claxton K. Establishing the cost-effectiveness of new pharmaceuticals under conditions of uncertainty—when is there sufficient evidence?Value Health 2005;8:433-46. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00033.x pmid:16091019. - DOI - PubMed

[8] Sculpher M, Claxton K. Establishing the cost-effectiveness of new pharmaceuticals under conditions of uncertainty—when is there sufficient evidence?Value Health 2005;8:433-46. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00033.x pmid:16091019. - DOI - PubMed

[9] Sculpher M, Drummond M, Buxton M. The iterative use of economic evaluation as part of the process of health technology assessment. J Health Serv Res Policy 1997;2:26-30.pmid:10180650. - PubMed

[10] Sculpher M, Drummond M, Buxton M. The iterative use of economic evaluation as part of the process of health technology assessment. J Health Serv Res Policy 1997;2:26-30.pmid:10180650. - PubMed

Save citation to file

Email citation

Add to Collections

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search

Create a file for external citation management software

Your RSS Feed

When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist

Affiliations

When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist

Authors

Affiliations

Erratum in

Abstract

Conflict of interest statement

Figures

Similar articles

Cited by

References

MeSH terms

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources

Other Literature Sources

Erratum in

Abstract

Conflict of interest statement

Figures

Similar articles

Cited by

References

MeSH terms

Related information

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources

Other Literature Sources