Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Commentary: Collaborative systematic review may produce and share highquality, comparative evidence more efficiently

  • Jill Hayden
  • , Rachel Ogilvie
  • , Sareen Singh
  • , Shazia Kashif
  • , Jan Hartvigsen
  • , Chris G Maher
  • , Andrea D Furlan
  • , Toby Lasserson
  • , Peter Tugwell
  • , Maurits van Tulder
  • , Amir Qaseem
  • , Manuela L Ferreira
  • , Rachelle Buchbinder
  • , Susan Wieland
  • , Fabianna R Jesus-Moraleida
  • , Bruno T Saragiotto
  • , Tie Parma Yamato
  • , Annemarie de Zoete
  • , Kasper Bülow
  • , Lisandra Almeida de Oliveira
  • Geronimo Bejarano, Carol Cancelliere
  • Dalhousie University
  • Nova Scotia Health Authority
  • University of Southern Denmark
  • Kiropraktorernes Videnscenter
  • University of Sydney
  • University of Toronto
  • The Cochrane Collaboration
  • University of Ottawa
  • University of Amsterdam
  • American College of Physicians
  • Monash University
  • University of Maryland School of Medicine
  • Federal University of Ceará
  • University of Technology Sydney
  • Universidade Cidade de Sao Paulo
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
  • McMaster University
  • University of Texas
  • Ontario Tech University

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Systematic reviews are necessary to synthesize available evidence and inform clinical practice and health policy decisions. There has been an explosion of evidence available in many fields; this makes it challenging to keep evidence syntheses up to date and useful. Comparative effectiveness systematic reviews are informative; however, producing these often-large reviews bring intense time and resource demands. This commentary describes the implementation of a systematic review using a collaborative model of evidence synthesis. We are implementing the collaborative review model to update a large Cochrane review investigating the efficacy and comparative effectiveness of the design, delivery, and type of exercise treatment for people with chronic low-back pain. Three key benefits of the collaborative review model for evidence synthesis are (1) team coordination and collaboration, (2) quality control measures, and (3) advanced comparative and other analyses. This new collaborative review model is developed and implemented to produce and share high-quality, comparative evidence more efficiently while building capacity and community within a research field.
Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume152
Pages (from-to)288-294
ISSN0895-4356
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Sept 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Commentary: Collaborative systematic review may produce and share highquality, comparative evidence more efficiently'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this