Article
A review found heterogeneous approaches and insufficient reporting in overviews on adverse events
Search Medline for
Authors
-
Thilo Sachse
- Witten/Herdecke University, Institute for Research in Operative Medicine, Deutschland
-
Tim Mathes
- Witten/Herdecke University, Institute for Research in Operative Medicine, Deutschland
-
Elena Dorando
- Witten/Herdecke University, Institute for Research in Operative Medicine, Deutschland
-
Simone Heß
- Witten/Herdecke University, Institute for Research in Operative Medicine, Deutschland
-
Petra Thürmann
- Helios University Hospital Wuppertal, Philipp Klee-Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Wuppertal, Deutschland
-
Sven Schmiedl
- Helios University Hospital Wuppertal, Philipp Klee-Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Wuppertal, Deutschland
-
Salmaan Kanji
- University of Ottawa, Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Kanada
-
Carole Lunny
- Unity Health Toronto, Knowledge Translation Program, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Kanada
-
Pierre Thabet
- Hôpital Montfort, Kanada
-
Dawid Pieper
- Witten/Herdecke University, Institute for Research in Operative Medicine, Deutschland; Brandenburg Medical School, Institute for Health Services and Health System Research, Deutschland
| Published: | March 21, 2023 |
|---|
Outline
Text
Background/research question: Overviews of reviews systematically identify, collect, and analyze systematic review (SR) results on the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of healthcare interventions. There are several purposes for overviews. In this paper we focus on overviews aiming to summarize evidence on the prevalence of adverse events of pharmacological interventions. While methods for conducting overviews in general have been subject to investigation and have evolved in the recent years, overviews on adverse events have not yet been analyzed in detail. Thus, we set out to investigate reporting and methodological characteristics of overviews on adverse (drug-associated) events (AEs) of pharmacological interventions.
Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Epistemonikos, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to May 17, 2021 for overviews exclusively investigating AEs of pharmacological interventions. Overviews that also focused on effectiveness were excluded. Study selection was performed by two reviewers independently. We extracted general, reporting, and methodological characteristics and analyzed data descriptively. One reviewer extracted relevant data from all included overviews and a second reviewer verified the results. At all steps, consensus was sought in case of discrepancies.
Results: We included 27 overviews, 70% of which were published in 2016 or later. The most common nomenclature in the title was "overview" (56%), followed by "umbrella review" (26%). The median number of included systematic reviews (SRs) in each overview was 15 (interquartile range 7–34). Study selection methods were reported in 52%, methods for data extraction in 67%, and methods for critical appraisal in 63% of overviews. An assessment of methodological quality of included SRs was performed in 70% of overviews. Only 22% of overviews reported strategies for dealing with overlapping SRs. An assessment of the certainty of the evidence was performed in 33% of overviews.
Conclusion: There is an increasing number of overviews on AEs being published and this specific type of overview presents unique challenges that should be considered by researchers. Authors of overviews on AEs should follow general guidance on overviews published by international evidence synthesis organizations to ensure methodological rigor and good reporting.
We declare that this work has already been published [1].
Competing interests: none
References
- 1.
- Sachse et al. A review found heterogeneous approaches and insufficient reporting in overviews on adverse events. J Clin Epidemiol. 2022 Aug 17;151:104-112. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.08.004.
