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

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

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

References

MeSH terms

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources

Other Literature Sources