TY - JOUR
PY - 2022//
TI - Commentary: Collaborative systematic review may produce and share high-quality, comparative evidence more efficiently
JO - Journal of clinical epidemiology
A1 - Hayden, J. A.
A1 - Hayden, Jill A.
A1 - Ogilvie, Rachel
A1 - Singh, Sareen
A1 - Kashif, Shazia
A1 - Hartvigsen, Jan
A1 - Maher, Chris G.
A1 - Furlan, Andrea D.
A1 - Lasserson, Toby
A1 - Tugwell, Peter
A1 - van Tulder, Maurits
A1 - Qaseem, Amir
A1 - Ferreira, Manuela L.
A1 - Buchbinder, Rachelle
A1 - Wieland, L. Susan
A1 - Jesus-Moraleida, Fabianna R.
A1 - Saragiotto, Bruno T.
A1 - Yamato, Tiê Parma
A1 - de Zoete, Annemarie
A1 - Bülow, Kasper
A1 - Almeida de Oliveira, Lisandra
A1 - Bejarano, Geronimo
A1 - Cancelliere, Carol
SP - ePub
EP - ePub
VL - ePub
IS - ePub
N2 - 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 exercise treatment design, delivery, and type characteristics 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. Language: en
LA - en
SN - 0895-4356
UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.09.013
ID - ref1
ER -