A multicomponent decision tool for prioritising the updating of systematic reviews
Open accessAbstract
There is no formal consensus on when to update a systematic review, and updating too frequently can be an inefficient use of resources and introduce bias. A multicomponent tool could help researchers decide when is best to update such reviews
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
We identified guidance documents and checklists that discuss SR updates, with applicability to living evidence.
“we did identify the guidance documents and checklists that discuss SR updates, with applicability to living evidence [42,43].19”
From A narrative review of recent tools and innovations toward automating living systematic reviews and evidence syntheses (2023) · cites this paper as [43]
We found two publications that are potentially useful for authors of living reviews to guide them through the decision-making process of when to publish full review updates.
“Although we did not include guidelines and tools for quality assessment in this discussion, we found two publications that are potentially useful for authors of living reviews to guide them through the decision-making process of when to publish full review updates [42,43].”
From A narrative review of recent tools and innovations toward automating living systematic reviews and evidence syntheses (2023) · cites this paper as [43]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139 · see citing works
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048 · see citing works
Pharmacological interventions for somatoform disorders in adults
Kleinstäuber, M., Witthöft, M., Steffanowski, A., van Marwijk, H., Hiller, W., & Lambert, M. J. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd010628.pub2 · Cited by 11,361 · see citing works
The cochrane database of systematic reviews
Geddes, J. R. (1996) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/s0022-3999(96)90063-x · Cited by 5,988 · see citing works
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
(2008) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-5614-7_436 · Cited by 4,552 · see citing works
Time to publication for results of clinical trials
Hopewell, S., Clarke, M. J., Stewart, L., & Tierney, J. (2007) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000011.pub2 · Cited by 243 · see citing works
Self-citationWhen and how to update systematic reviews
Moher, D., Tsertsvadze, A., Tricco, A. C., Eccles, M., Grimshaw, J., Sampson, M., & Barrowman, N. (2008) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000023.pub3 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Evidence‐based sample size calculations based upon updated meta‐analysis
Sutton, A. J., Cooper, N. J., Jones, D. R., Lambert, P. C., Thompson, J. R., & Abrams, K. R. (2006) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2704 · Cited by 147 · see citing works
Self-citationThe automation of systematic reviews
Tsafnat, G., Dunn, A., Glasziou, P., & Coiera, E. (2013) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.f139 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
When is a further clinical trial justified?
Ferreira, M. L., Herbert, R., Crowther, M. J., Verhagen, A. P., & Sutton, A. J. (2012) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.e5913 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Self-citationShojania, K. G., Sampson, M., Ansari, M. T., Ji, J., Garritty, C., Rader, T., & Moher, D. (2007) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Identifying null meta-analyses that are ripe for updating
Barrowman, N. J., Fang, M., Sampson, M., & Moher, D. (2003) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-3-13 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Updating comparative effectiveness reviews: Current efforts in AHRQ's Effective Health Care Program
Tsertsvadze, A., Maglione, M., Chou, R., Garritty, C., Coleman, C. I., Lux, L. J., Bass, E. B., Balshem, H., & Moher, D. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.03.011 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
An encouraging assessment of methods to inform priorities for updating systematic reviews
Sutton, A. J., Donegan, S., Takwoingi, Y., Garner, P., Gamble, C. L., & Donald, A. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.04.005 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Self-citationLinde, K. (2006) · EXPLORE · doi:10.1016/j.explore.2006.05.016 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
When and how to update systematic reviews
Moher, D., Barrowman, N. J., Daniel, R. P., Eccles, M., Grimshaw, J., Sampson, M., Tricco, A. C., & Tsertsvadze, A. (2007) · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000023.pub2 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
A decision tool for updating Cochrane reviews
Hopewell, S., Loudon, K., Clarke, M. J., Moher, D., Scholten, R. J. P. M., Eisinga, A., & French, S. (2008) · Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Self-citationEinheitsgericht oder à la carte? Die umfassende Bewertung gesundheitlicher Technologien
Perleth, M., Gerhardus, A., & Garrido, M. V. (2008) · Zeitschrift für Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen · doi:10.1016/j.zefq.2008.02.005 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Higgins JPT, Green S, Scholten RJPM. Chapter 3: Maintaining reviews: updates, amendments and feedback. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
- Loudon K, Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, French S, Scholten R, et al. Development of a decision tool for updating Cochrane reviews. Presentation at the 16th Cochrane Colloquium: Evidence in the era of globalisation; 2008 Oct 3-7; Freiburg, Germany [abstract]. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 2008;102:24-5.
- MacLehose H, Hilton J, Tovey D, Becker L, Binder L, Chandler J, et al. The Cochrane Library: revolution or evolution? Shaping the future of Cochrane content: report of the Cochrane Collaboration's strategic session, Paris, France, 18 April 2012. www.editorial- For personal use only: See rights and reprints http://www.bmj.com/permissions Subscribe: http://www.bmj.com/subscribe RESEARCH METHODS & REPORTING on 8 June 2023 by guest. Protected by copyright. http://www.bmj.com/ BMJ: first published as 10.1136/bmj.f7191 on 13 December 2013. Downloaded from
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Systematic review automation technologies
Tsafnat, G., Glasziou, P., Choong, M. K., Dunn, A., Galgani, F., & Coiera, E. (2014) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-3-74 · Cited by 472 · see citing works
“However, even the conduct and upkeep of updated systematic reviews required to answer a significant proportion of clinical questions, is beyond our means without automation [3-9].”
BackgroundWhen and how to update systematic reviews: consensus and checklist
Garner, P., Hopewell, S., Chandler, J., MacLehose, H., Schünemann, H. J., Akl, E. A., Beyene, J., Chang, S., Churchill, R., Dearness, K., et al. (2016) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.i3507 · Cited by 426 · see citing works
Self-citationStudy flow diagrams in Cochrane systematic review updates: an adapted PRISMA flow diagram
Stovold, E., Beecher, D., Foxlee, R., & Noel-Storr, A. (2014) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-3-54 · Cited by 356 · see citing works
Schmidt, L., Sinyor, M., Webb, R. T., Marshall, C., Knipe, D., Eyles, E. C., John, A., Gunnell, D., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2023) · Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen · doi:10.1016/j.zefq.2023.06.007 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Prospective approaches to accumulating evidence
Thomas, J., Askie, L. M., Berlin, J. A., Elliott, J. H., Ghersi, D., Simmonds, M., Takwoingi, Y., Tierney, J. F., & Higgins, J. P. (2019) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9781119536604.ch22 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Self-citationBashir, R., & Dunn, A. G. (2016) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013048 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
- Authors
- Takwoingi, Y., Hopewell, S., Tovey, D., & Sutton, A. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Birmingham (GB)
- Inserm (FR)
- Cochrane (GB)
- University of Leicester (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Takwoingi, Y.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2013-12-13
- Volume
- 347
- Issue
- dec13 1
- Pages
- f7191-f7191
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2103760926
- Cited by
- 57
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4
- FWCI
- 0.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Keywords
- systematic review updating, decision tools, resource efficiency
- MeSH terms
- Decision Support Techniques, Humans, Review Literature as Topic
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
