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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

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 languageEnglish
Article numberj2998
JournalBMJ (Clinical research ed.)
Volume358
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 20 Jul 2017

Fingerprint

Peer Review
Research

Cite this

Hoffmann, Tammy C ; Oxman, Andrew D. ; Ioannidis, John Pa ; Moher, David ; Lasserson, Toby J ; Tovey, David I ; Stein, Ken ; Sutcliffe, Katy ; Ravaud, Philippe ; Altman, Douglas G ; Perera, Rafael ; Glasziou, Paul. / Enhancing the usability of systematic reviews by improving the consideration and description of interventions. In: BMJ (Clinical research ed.). 2017 ; Vol. 358.
@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 = "7",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1136/bmj.j2998",
language = "English",
volume = "358",
journal = "BMJ (Clinical research ed.)",
issn = "0959-535X",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",

}

Hoffmann, TC, Oxman, AD, Ioannidis, JP, Moher, D, Lasserson, TJ, Tovey, DI, Stein, K, Sutcliffe, K, Ravaud, P, Altman, DG, Perera, R & Glasziou, P 2017, 'Enhancing the usability of systematic reviews by improving the consideration and description of interventions' BMJ (Clinical research ed.), vol. 358, j2998. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j2998

Enhancing the usability of systematic reviews by improving the consideration and description of interventions. / Hoffmann, Tammy C; Oxman, Andrew D.; Ioannidis, John Pa; Moher, David; Lasserson, Toby J; Tovey, David I; Stein, Ken; Sutcliffe, Katy; Ravaud, Philippe; Altman, Douglas G; Perera, Rafael; Glasziou, Paul.

In: BMJ (Clinical research ed.), Vol. 358, j2998, 20.07.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

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

VL - 358

JO - BMJ (Clinical research ed.)

JF - BMJ (Clinical research ed.)

SN - 0959-535X

M1 - j2998

ER -