Influence of Methodological Expertise on Assessment of Systematic Review Searches using PRISMA and AMSTAR
Download Full Text
Objective: Many studies have assessed PRISMA compliance of systematic reviews in biomedical disciplines, including items relating to information sources and search strategies. Additional studies have used AMSTAR, AMSTAR 2, or R-AMSTAR to assess systematic review quality, including the comprehensiveness of the search methods. In this study, we will examine whether searching expertise is associated with lower perceived compliance with PRISMA items relating to search methods and AMSTAR ratings of search comprehensiveness.
Design: We will identify studies that evaluate biomedical systematic reviews on compliance with PRISMA 2009, PRISMA 2020, or relevant PRISMA extensions (e.g., PRISMA-EcoEvo, PRISMA-S, PRISMA Harms, etc) or critically appraise them using AMSTAR, AMSTAR 2, or R-AMSTAR as a primary outcome. Studies that use PRISMA, a PRIS MA extension, AMSTAR, AMSTAR 2, or R-AMSTAR as part of a critical appraisal for inclusion in a systematic review, umbrella systematic review, evidence map, or other evidence synthesis will be excluded. We will conduct a search in Ovid MEDLINE ALL13, 2021 > to identify studies added to MEDLINE from July 31, 2017 to the present. Earlier studies using PRISMA will be identified from Page & Moher's prior scoping review; earlier studies using AMSTAR will be identified with an additional MEDLINE search. We will screen each study for inclusion in duplicate using Covidence. For each identified study, we will determine whether the search was assessed. For each aspect of the search assessed, we will record the number of systematic reviews in the study, the number of systematic reviews meeting search-related criteria, any definitions for how the authors interpreted search-related criteria, and whether librarians or information specialists contributed to the assessment. We will also record whether the study included systematic reviews published before and/or after the publication of PRISMA 2009. Due to the heterogenous nature of the data, basic descriptive statistics will be used to present findings.
Results: MEDLI NE searches were conducted on December 14, 2021. 1,627 results were found. Full results will be presented at EAHIL.
Conclusions: Full conclusions will be presented at EAHIL. We anticipate that this study will add to professionalism, understanding, and knowledge of information specialists as experts in systematic review work.
EAHIL '22 Broaden The Horizons - diversity, partnership and innovation with a human touch
Systematic Reviews, search strategies
Rethlefsen, Melissa L. and Shelley de Kock. "Influence of Methodological Expertise on Assessment of Systematic Review Searches using PRISMA and AMSTAR." (2022). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/hslic-posters-presentations/93