Living systematic reviews in rehabilitation science can improve evidence-based healthcare

Systematic Reviews

U. Kaiser¹  J. Kleijnen²  R. Smeets³  A. Köke⁴  H. Wittink⁵  J. Pool⁵  S. Elbers⁶ 

[1] Comprehensive Pain Center, Medical Faculty Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany;University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden, Dresden, Germany;Department of Family Medicine, Research School CAPHRI, Faculty of Health, Life Sciences and Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands;Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Research School CAPHRI, Faculty of Health, Life Sciences and Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands;CIR Revalidatie, location Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands;Pain in Motion International Research Group (PiM);Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Research School CAPHRI, Faculty of Health, Life Sciences and Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands;Centre of Expertise in Pain and Rehabilitation, Adelante, Maastricht, The Netherlands;South University of Applied Sciences Heerlen, Heerlen, The Netherlands;Research group Lifestyle & Health, Research Centre Healthy and Sustainable Living, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, P.O. Box 12011, 3508, Utrecht, AA, The Netherlands;Research group Lifestyle & Health, Research Centre Healthy and Sustainable Living, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, P.O. Box 12011, 3508, Utrecht, AA, The Netherlands;Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Research School CAPHRI, Faculty of Health, Life Sciences and Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands;

关键词: Systematic review;    Living systematic review;    Rehabilitation;    Chronic pain;    Methods;    Meta-analysis;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s13643-021-01857-5

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

Although systematic reviews are considered as central components in evidence-based practice, they currently face an important challenge to keep up with the exponential publication rate of clinical trials. After initial publication, only a minority of the systematic reviews are updated, and it often takes multiple years before these results become accessible. Consequently, many systematic reviews are not up to date, thereby increasing the time-gap between research findings and clinical practice. A potential solution is offered by a living systematic reviews approach. These types of studies are characterized by a workflow of continuous updates which decreases the time it takes to disseminate new findings. Although living systematic reviews are specifically designed to continuously synthesize new evidence in rapidly emerging topics, they have also considerable potential in slower developing domains, such as rehabilitation science. In this commentary, we outline the rationale and required steps to transition a regular systematic review into a living systematic review. We also propose a workflow that is designed for rehabilitation science.

【 授权许可】

CC BY