The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The development of software to support multiple systematic review types: the Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI)
Abstract
AIM: Systematic reviews play an important role in ensuring trustworthy recommendations in healthcare. However, systematic reviews can be laborious to undertake and as such software has been developed to assist in the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The Joanna Briggs Institute and its collaborating centres consist of thousands of researchers, academics and clinicians across the globe conducting systematic reviews of various types. To support them in their work, modern software and online tools are required. Our aim was to develop a software program to support systematic reviewers across the globe. METHODS: A working party was formed with extensive consultation with members of the Joanna Briggs Collaboration focusing on ideal features of a software program to support systematic reviews. The new systematic review software was built using an agile methodology and designed to be a modern web application. RESULTS: The new systematic review software, the Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI), was successfully developed through an iterative process of development, feedback, testing and review. The software is now available (https://www.jbisumari.org/) and supports the entire systematic review process for different types of systematic reviews. CONCLUSIONS: An agile software development approach combined with wide consultation and user testing can facilitate systematic review software design and development. This new software can support systematic reviews and guideline developers to create systematic reviews for a diverse range of questions.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cites
GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G. E., Kunz, R., Falck-Ytter, Y., Alonso-Coello, P., & Schünemann, H. J. (2008) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.ad · Cited by 23,305
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2700 · Cited by 17,648
Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review
Dybå, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2008.01.006 · Cited by 2,668
Lockwood, C., Munn, Z., & Porritt, K. (2015) · International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare · doi:10.1097/xeb.0000000000000062 · Cited by 2,456
Self-citationEvidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach
Khangura, S., Konnyu, K., Cushman, R., Grimshaw, J., & Moher, D. (2012) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-1-10 · Cited by 1,232
Munn, Z., Stern, C., Aromataris, E., Lockwood, C., & Jordan, Z. (2018) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4 · Cited by 1,164
Self-citationEstablishing confidence in the output of qualitative research synthesis: the ConQual approach.
Munn, Z., Porritt, K., Lockwood, C., Aromataris, E., & Pearson, A. (2014) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-108 · Cited by 803
Self-citationExpediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews
Ganann, R., Ciliska, D., & Thomas, H. (2010) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-5-56 · Cited by 752
Borah, R., Brown, A. W., Capers, P. L., & Kaiser, K. A. (2017) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012545 · Cited by 737
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x · Cited by 11,385
Self-citationMethodological quality of case series studies: an introduction to the JBI critical appraisal tool
Munn, Z., Barker, T. H., Moola, S., Tufanaru, C., Stern, C., McArthur, A., Stephenson, M., & Aromataris, E. (2019) · JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports · doi:10.11124/jbisrir-d-19-00099 · Cited by 1,581
Self-citationBest practice guidance and reporting items for the development of scoping review protocols
Peters, M. D. J., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Khalil, H., Larsen, P., Marnie, C., Pollock, D., Tricco, A. C., & Munn, Z. (2022) · JBI Evidence Synthesis · doi:10.11124/jbies-21-00242 · Cited by 1,444
Self-citationPollock, D., Davies, E. L., Peters, M. D. J., Tricco, A. C., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C. M., Khalil, H., & Munn, Z. (2021) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.14743 · Cited by 769
“…frameworks), co-authors for the study selection and extraction process, software to support the process (such as SUMARI and/or reference management software) (Munn et al., 2019), an academic librarian to assist with preparing the search strategy, and sufficient time (Peters, Godfrey, et al., 2020).”
MethodInfluentialSelf-citationBarker, T. H., Migliavaca, C. B., Stein, C., Colpani, V., Falavigna, M., Aromataris, E., & Munn, Z. (2021) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-021-01381-z · Cited by 738
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Munn, Z., Aromataris, E., Tufanaru, C., Stern, C., Porritt, K., Farrow, J., Lockwood, C., Stephenson, M., Moola, S., Lizarondo, L., McArthur, A., Peters, M., Pearson, A., & Jordan, Z.
- Affiliations
- The University of Adelaide (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Munn, Zachary
- ORCID
- Venue
- International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare
- Published
- 2019-03
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 36-43
- ISSN
- 1744-1595 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-1609
- OpenAlex
- W2892590175
- Cited by
- 977
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 142 · 2025: 197 · 2024: 190 · 2023: 141 · 2022: 132 · 2021: 112 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 7
- FWCI
- 8.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Keywords
- systematic review software, Joanna Briggs Institute, web application, agile software development, user testing, software design, guideline development, health care recommendations
- MeSH terms
- Systematic Reviews as Topic, Software
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
