Development of outcome-specific criteria for study evaluation in systematic reviews of epidemiology studies.

08:00 EDT 9th July 2019 | BioPortfolio

Summary of "Development of outcome-specific criteria for study evaluation in systematic reviews of epidemiology studies."

Systematic review tools that provide guidance on evaluating epidemiology studies are receiving increasing attention and support because their application facilitates improved quality of the review, consistency across reviewers, and transparency for readers. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Program has developed an approach for systematic review of evidence of health effects from chemical exposures that includes structured approaches for literature search and screening, study evaluation, data extraction, and evidence synthesis and integration. This approach recognizes the need for developing outcome-specific criteria for study evaluation. Because studies are assessed at the outcome level, a study could be considered high quality for one investigated outcome, and low quality for another, due to differences in the outcome measures, analytic strategies, how relevant a certain bias is to the outcome, and how the exposure measure relates to the outcome. The objective of this paper is to illustrate the need for outcome-specific criteria in study evaluation or risk of bias evaluation, describe the process we used to develop the criteria, and summarize the resulting criteria.


Journal Details

This article was published in the following journal.

Name: Environment international
ISSN: 1873-6750
Pages: 104884


DeepDyve research library

PubMed Articles [43367 Associated PubMed Articles listed on BioPortfolio]

Seeking adverse effects in systematic reviews of orthodontic interventions: protocol for a cross-sectional study.

Before implementing healthcare interventions, clinicians need to weigh the beneficial and adverse effects of interventions. However, a large body of evidence has demonstrated that seeking and reportin...

Relationship Between Occupational Trauma, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Depression - An Assessment of Systematic Reviews.

In a meta-review systematic reviews were assessed with AMSTAR, a validated instrument for the quality judgement. In a systematic search in Pubmed and PsycINFO during the period 2006 - 2016 8,223 h...

Overview authors rarely defined systematic reviews that are included in their overviews.

To report systematic review definitions that are published in overviews of reviews and to propose a new classification of systematic reviews.

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis in rheumatology: a gentle introduction for clinicians.

Given the plethora of studies today on the same topic, clinicians in rheumatology as well as others increasingly rely on systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis, to aid in their evidence-bas...

Applying software engineering principles to address current problems in the systematic review ecosystem.

Systematic reviewers are simultaneously unable to produce systematic reviews fast enough to keep up with the availability of new trial evidence while over-producing systematic reviews that are unlikel...

Clinical Trials [11480 Associated Clinical Trials listed on BioPortfolio]

Umbrella Review of the DASH Dietary Pattern and Cardiometabolic Risk

The European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) guidelines have not made any specific recommendations regarding the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet, a dietary...

Presenting Summary Information From Cochrane Systematic Reviews

The objective of the investigators study is to evaluate the efficacy of infographics in presenting information, in terms of understanding and remembering research results, compared to stan...

Meta-analysis of Fruit and Vegetable Sources and Cardiovascular Outcomes

Fruit and vegetables are a cornerstone of healthy dietary patterns and dietary guidelines worldwide. The supporting evidence, however, is largely derived from observational studies of prot...

Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Nuts and Obesity

Peanuts and tree nuts (almonds, pistachios, walnuts, pecans, pine nuts, Brazil nuts, cashews, hazelnuts, macadamia nuts) (herein referred to as "nuts") are a good source of unsaturated fat...

Testing New Formats for the Presentation of Research Evidence to Health Care Managers and Policy Makers

Despite advances in the conduct and reporting of traditional systematic reviews, current evidence suggests that they are used infrequently by health care managers and policy makers in deci...

Medical and Biotech [MESH] Definitions

An internationally recognized set of published rules used for evaluation of cancer treatment that define when tumors found in cancer patients improve, worsen, or remain stable during treatment. These criteria are based specifically on the response of the tumor(s) to treatment, and not on the overall health status of the patient resulting from treatment.

Books intended for use in the study of specific subjects, containing systematic presentation of the principles and essential knowledge of the subjects.

Criteria and standards used for the determination of the appropriateness of the inclusion of patients with specific conditions in proposed treatment plans and the criteria used for the inclusion of subjects in various clinical trials and other research protocols.

Work that is the report of a pre-planned clinical study of the safety, efficacy, or optimum dosage schedule of one or more diagnostic, therapeutic, or prophylactic drugs, devices, or techniques in humans selected according to predetermined criteria of eligibility and observed for predefined evidence of favorable and unfavorable effects. While most clinical trials concern humans, this publication type may be used for clinical veterinary articles meeting the requisites for humans. Specific headings for specific types and phases of clinical trials are also available.

The influence of study results on the chances of publication and the tendency of investigators, reviewers, and editors to submit or accept manuscripts for publication based on the direction or strength of the study findings. Publication bias has an impact on the interpretation of clinical trials and meta-analyses. Bias can be minimized by insistence by editors on high-quality research, thorough literature reviews, acknowledgement of conflicts of interest, modification of peer review practices, etc.

Quick Search


DeepDyve research library

Searches Linking to this Article