When and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist
Paul Garner(Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine), Sally Hopewell(University of Oxford), Jackie Chandler(Cochrane), Harriet MacLehose(Cochrane), Holger J. Schünemann(Ontario Clinical Oncology Group), Elie A. Akl(Cochrane), Joseph Beyene(McMaster University), Stephanie Chang(Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality), Rachel Churchill(University of York), Karin Dearness(Ontario Clinical Oncology Group), Gordon Guyatt(McMaster University), Carol Lefebvre, Beth Liles(Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research), Iain Marshall(Cochrane), Laura Martínez García(Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre), Chris Mavergames, Mona Nasser, Amir Qaseem(American College of Physicians), Margaret Sampson(Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario), Karla Soares‐Weiser(Cochrane), Yemisi Takwoingi(University of Birmingham), Lehana Thabane(McMaster University), Marialena Trivella(University of Oxford), Peter Tugwell(University of Ottawa), Emma J Welsh(St George's, University of London), Ed Wilson(University of Cambridge), Panel for updating guidance for systematic reviews (PUGs)
Cited by 425Open Access
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.
Related Papers
No related papers found
Powered by citation graph analysis