Enhancing the usability of systematic reviews by improving the consideration and description of interventions

Tammy C Hoffmann; Andrew D. Oxman; John Pa Ioannidis; David Moher; Toby J Lasserson; David I Tovey; Ken Stein; Katy Sutcliffe; Philippe Ravaud; Douglas G Altman; Rafael Perera; Paul Glasziou

doi:10.1136/bmj.j2998

Enhancing the usability of systematic reviews by improving the consideration and description of interventions

Tammy C Hoffmann, Andrew D. Oxman, John Pa Ioannidis, David Moher, Toby J Lasserson, David I Tovey, Ken Stein, Katy Sutcliffe, Philippe Ravaud, Douglas G Altman, Rafael Perera, Paul Glasziou

Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review

149 Citations (Scopus)

96 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The importance of adequate intervention descriptions in minimising research waste and improving research usability and reproducibility has gained attention in the past few years. Nearly all focus to date has been on intervention reporting in randomised trials. Yet clinicians are encouraged to use systematic reviews, whenever available, rather than single trials to inform their practice. This article explores the problem and implications of incomplete intervention details during the planning, conduct, and reporting of systematic reviews and makes recommendations for review authors, peer reviewers, and journal editors.

Original language	English
Article number	j2998
Journal	The BMJ
Volume	358
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j2998
Publication status	Published - 20 Jul 2017

Access to Document

10.1136/bmj.j2998

Enhancing the usability of systematic reviews by improving the consideration and description of interventionsAccepted author manuscript, 1.08 MBLicence: CC BY-NC

Cite this

@article{d4f397908d2149948881be2d220344d4,

title = "Enhancing the usability of systematic reviews by improving the consideration and description of interventions",

abstract = "The importance of adequate intervention descriptions in minimising research waste and improving research usability and reproducibility has gained attention in the past few years. Nearly all focus to date has been on intervention reporting in randomised trials. Yet clinicians are encouraged to use systematic reviews, whenever available, rather than single trials to inform their practice. This article explores the problem and implications of incomplete intervention details during the planning, conduct, and reporting of systematic reviews and makes recommendations for review authors, peer reviewers, and journal editors.",

author = "Hoffmann, {Tammy C} and Oxman, {Andrew D.} and Ioannidis, {John Pa} and David Moher and Lasserson, {Toby J} and Tovey, {David I} and Ken Stein and Katy Sutcliffe and Philippe Ravaud and Altman, {Douglas G} and Rafael Perera and Paul Glasziou",

year = "2017",

month = jul,

day = "20",

doi = "10.1136/bmj.j2998",

language = "English",

volume = "358",

journal = "The BMJ",

issn = "0267-0623",

publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Enhancing the usability of systematic reviews by improving the consideration and description of interventions

AU - Hoffmann, Tammy C

AU - Oxman, Andrew D.

AU - Ioannidis, John Pa

AU - Moher, David

AU - Lasserson, Toby J

AU - Tovey, David I

AU - Stein, Ken

AU - Sutcliffe, Katy

AU - Ravaud, Philippe

AU - Altman, Douglas G

AU - Perera, Rafael

AU - Glasziou, Paul

PY - 2017/7/20

Y1 - 2017/7/20

N2 - The importance of adequate intervention descriptions in minimising research waste and improving research usability and reproducibility has gained attention in the past few years. Nearly all focus to date has been on intervention reporting in randomised trials. Yet clinicians are encouraged to use systematic reviews, whenever available, rather than single trials to inform their practice. This article explores the problem and implications of incomplete intervention details during the planning, conduct, and reporting of systematic reviews and makes recommendations for review authors, peer reviewers, and journal editors.

AB - The importance of adequate intervention descriptions in minimising research waste and improving research usability and reproducibility has gained attention in the past few years. Nearly all focus to date has been on intervention reporting in randomised trials. Yet clinicians are encouraged to use systematic reviews, whenever available, rather than single trials to inform their practice. This article explores the problem and implications of incomplete intervention details during the planning, conduct, and reporting of systematic reviews and makes recommendations for review authors, peer reviewers, and journal editors.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85025444989&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmj.j2998

DO - 10.1136/bmj.j2998

M3 - Article

C2 - 28729459

SN - 0267-0623

VL - 358

JO - The BMJ

JF - The BMJ

M1 - j2998

ER -

Enhancing the usability of systematic reviews by improving the consideration and description of interventions

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this