Nelson Systematic Reviews to Answer Healthcare, Questions, 2e

77

Chapter 6 • Selecting Studies for Inclusion

4. Peinemann F, McGauran N, Sauerland S, Lange S. Disagreement in primary study selection between systematic reviews on negative pressure wound therapy. BMC Med Res Meth . 2008;8(1):41. 5. Thompson R, Bandera E, Burley V, et al. Reproducibility of systematic literature reviews on food, nutrition, physical activity and endometrial cancer. Public Health Nutr . 2007;2:1–9. 6. Treadwell JR, Singh S, Talati R, McPheeters ML, Reston JT. A framework for best evidence approaches can improve the transparency of systematic reviews. J Clin Epi . 2012;65(11):1159–1162. 7. Nelson HD, Cantor A, Wagner J, et al. Effectiveness of patient navigation to increase cancer screening in populations adversely affected by health disparities: a meta-analysis. J Gen Intern Med . 2020;35:3026–3035. 8. McDonagh M, Carson S, Ash J, et al. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for brain injury, cerebral palsy, and stroke. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ) . 2003;85:1–6. 9. McDonagh M, Helfand M, Carson S, Russman BS. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for traumatic brain injury: a system atic review of the evidence. Arch Phys Med Rehab . 2004;85(7):1198–1204. 10. Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, et al, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane, 2022. Accessed October 30, 2023. www.training.cochrane.org/handbook 11. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD’s Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care . 3rd ed. York, UK: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York; 2009. 12. McDonagh MS, Peterson K, Raina P, Chang S, Shekelle P. Avoiding Bias in Selecting Studies. Methods Guide for Comparative Effectiveness Reviews . AHRQ publication 13-EHC045-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2013. 13. Chou R, Aronson N, Atkins D, et al. AHRQ series paper 4: assessing harms when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the effective health-care program. J Clin Epi . 2010;63(5):502–512. 14. Norris S, Atkins D, Bruening W, et al. Selecting Observational Studies for Comparing Medical Interventions. Methods Guide for Comparative Effectiveness Reviews . Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010. 15. Hartling L, Bond K, Harvey K, Santaguida PL, Viswanathan M, Dryden DM. Developing and Testing a Tool for the Classification of Study Designs in Systematic Reviews of Interventions and Exposures . AHRQ publication 11-EHC-007. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010. 16. Edwards P, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Pratap S, Roberts I, Wentz R. Identification of randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews: accuracy and reliability of screening records. Stat Med . 2002;21(11):1635–1640. 17. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med . 2010;152(11):726–732. 18. Peterson K, Helfand M, Humphrey L, Christensen V, Carson S. Evidence Brief: Effectiveness of Intensive Primary Care Programs. Veterans Affairs Evidence Synthesis Program Project #09-199; 2013. 19. Sacks HS, Berrier J, Reitman D, Ancona-Berk VA, Chalmers TC. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med . 1987;316(8):450–455. 20. Berlin JA. Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? Lancet . 1997;350(9072):185–186. 21. Nelson HD, Cantor A, Pappas M, Weeks C. Screening for anxiety in adolescent and adult women: a systematic review for the Women’s Preventive Services Initiative. Ann Intern Med . 2020;173:29–41. 22. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting system atic reviews. BMJ . 2021;372:n71. 23. Haddaway NR, Page MJ, Pritchard CC, McGuinness LA. PRISMA2020: An R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020-compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis. Campbell Syst Rev . 2022;18:e1230. 24. Nelson HD, Haney E, Dana T, Fu R, Bougatsos C. Screening for osteoporosis evidence review to update the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med . 2010;153:1–13. 25. Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality. Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews . Accessed October 10, 2023. https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/products/collections/cer-methods-guide

Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of the content is prohibited.