Thoth: A Web-based Tool to Support Systematic Reviews

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luciano Marchezan ◽  
Guilherme Bolfe ◽  
Elder Rodrigues ◽  
Maicon Bernardino ◽  
Fabio Paulo Basso
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Web Based

scholarly journals PRISMA2020: an R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020-compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neal R Haddaway ◽  
Matthew J Page ◽  
Christopher C Pritchard ◽  
Luke A McGuinness
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
R Package ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Shiny App ◽  
Data Files ◽  
Flow Diagrams

Background Reporting standards, such as PRISMA aim to ensure that the methods and results of systematic reviews are described in sufficient detail to allow full transparency. Flow diagrams in evidence syntheses allow the reader to rapidly understand the core procedures used in a review and examine the attrition of irrelevant records throughout the review process. Recent research suggests that use of flow diagrams in systematic reviews is poor and of low quality and called for standardised templates to facilitate better reporting in flow diagrams. The increasing options for interactivity provided by the Internet gives us an opportunity to support easy-to-use evidence synthesis tools, and here we report on the development of tools for the production of PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review flow diagrams. Methods and Findings We developed a free-to-use, Open Source R package and web-based Shiny app to allow users to design PRISMA flow diagrams for their own systematic reviews. Our tools allow users to produce standardised visualisations that transparently document the methods and results of a systematic review process in a variety of formats. In addition, we provide the opportunity to produce interactive, web-based flow diagrams (exported as HTML files), that allow readers to click on boxes of the diagram and navigate to further details on methods, results or data files. We provide an interactive example here; https://driscoll.ntu.ac.uk/prisma/. Conclusions We have developed a user-friendly suite of tools for producing PRISMA 2020-compliant flow diagrams for users with coding experience and, importantly, for users without prior experience in coding by making use of Shiny. These free-to-use tools will make it easier to produce clear and PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review flow diagrams. Significantly, users can also produce interactive flow diagrams for the first time, allowing readers of their reviews to smoothly and swiftly explore and navigate to further details of the methods and results of a review. We believe these tools will increase use of PRISMA flow diagrams, improve the compliance and quality of flow diagrams, and facilitate strong science communication of the methods and results of systematic reviews by making use of interactivity. We encourage the systematic review community to make use of these tools, and provide feedback to streamline and improve their usability and efficiency.

scholarly journals Visual Evidence: Increasing Usability of Systematic Reviews in Health Systems Guidelines Development

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (04) ◽  
pp. 743-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Connor J. Smith ◽  
Rebecca M. Jungbauer ◽  
Annette M. Totten
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Visual Analytics ◽  
Dynamic Visualization ◽  
Static Structure ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Guidelines Development ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
Visualization Of Data ◽  
Aid Decision

Abstract Background Integration of evidence from systematic reviews is an essential step in the development of clinical guidelines. The current practice for reporting uses a static structure that does not allow for dynamic investigation. A need exists for an alternate reporting modality to facilitate dynamic visualization of results to match different end-users' queries. Objectives We developed a dynamic visualization of data from a systematic review using the commercial product Tableau and assessed its potential to permit customized inquiries. Methods Data were selected and extracted from a previously completed systematic review. The resulting dataset was then used to develop an interactive, web-based report designed for use by a guidelines development committee. Results A novel example of combining existing reporting standards for systematic review data and modern reporting tools was developed to investigate potential benefits of a dynamic report. Demonstrations of the report to clinicians sitting on previous and future guideline committees received positive feedback for its potential benefit in guidelines development. The report received a runner-up award during the design challenge at the 2018 Workshop on Visual Analytics in Health Care. Conclusion The use of interactive, accessible data may increase the use of systematic reviews and aid decision makers in developing evidence-based practice changes.

scholarly journals Is There a Consensus when Physicians Evaluate the Relevance of Retrieved Systematic Reviews?

2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (03) ◽  
pp. 292-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dympna O’Sullivan ◽  
Craig Kuziemsky ◽  
Wojtek Michalowski ◽  
Ken Farion ◽  
Bartosz Kukawka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Clinical Setting ◽  
Contextual Factors ◽  
Clinical Information ◽  
Pediatric Emergency ◽  
Emergency Physicians ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Case Vignettes ◽  
Study Participants ◽  
Based Medicine

SummaryBackground: A significant challenge associated with practicing evidence-based medicine is to provide physicians with relevant clinical information when it is needed. At the same time it appears that the notion of relevance is subjective and its perception is affected by a number of contextual factors.Objectives: To assess to what extent physi -cians agree on the relevance of evidence in the form of systematic reviews for a common set of patient cases, and to identify possible contextual factors that influence their perception of relevance.Methods: A web-based survey was used where pediatric emergency physicians from multiple academic centers across Canada were asked to evaluate the relevance of systematic reviews retrieved automatically for 14 written case vignettes (paper patients). The vignettes were derived from prospective data describing pediatric patients with asthma exacerbations presenting at the emer gency department. To limit the cognitive burden on respondents, the number of reviews associated with each vignette was limited to three.Results: Twenty-two academic emergency physicians with varying years of clinical practice completed the survey. There was no consensus in their evaluation of relevance of the retrieved reviews and physicians’ assessments ranged from very relevant to irrelevant evidence, with the majority of evaluations being somewhere in the middle. This indicates that the study participants did not share a notion of relevance uniformly. Further analysis of commentaries provided by the physicians allowed identifying three possible contextual factors: expected speci ficity of evidence (acute vs chronic condition), the terminology used in the systematic reviews, and the micro environment of clinical setting.Conclusions: There is no consensus among physicians with regards to what constitutes relevant clinical evidence for a given patient case. Subsequently, this finding suggests that evidence retrieval systems should allow for deep customization with regards to physi -cian’s preferences and contextual factors, including differences in the micro environment of each clinical setting.

scholarly journals The development and evaluation of an online application to assist in the extraction of data from graphs for use in systematic reviews

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 157
Author(s):  
Fala Cramond ◽  
Alison O'Mara-Eves ◽  
Lee Doran-Constant ◽  
Andrew SC Rice ◽  
Malcolm Macleod ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Online Application ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Graphical Data ◽  
Data Extraction Tool ◽  
Increase In Accuracy

Background: The extraction of data from the reports of primary studies, on which the results of systematic reviews depend, needs to be carried out accurately. To aid reliability, it is recommended that two researchers carry out data extraction independently. The extraction of statistical data from graphs in PDF files is particularly challenging, as the process is usually completely manual, and reviewers need sometimes to revert to holding a ruler against the page to read off values: an inherently time-consuming and error-prone process. Methods: To mitigate some of the above problems we integrated and customised two existing JavaScript libraries to create a new web-based graphical data extraction tool to assist reviewers in extracting data from graphs. This tool aims to facilitate more accurate and timely data extraction through a user interface which can be used to extract data through mouse clicks. We carried out a non-inferiority evaluation to examine its performance in comparison to standard practice. Results: We found that the customised graphical data extraction tool is not inferior to users’ prior preferred current approaches. Our study was not designed to show superiority, but suggests that there may be a saving in time of around 6 minutes per graph, accompanied by a substantial increase in accuracy. Conclusions: Our study suggests that the incorporation of this type of tool in online systematic review software would be beneficial in facilitating the production of accurate and timely evidence synthesis to improve decision-making.

scholarly journals Telemedicine Use Among Caregivers of Cancer Patients: Systematic Review (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chiara Marzorati ◽  
Chiara Renzi ◽  
Samuel William Russell-Edu ◽  
Gabriella Pravettoni
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
User Satisfaction ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Web Based

BACKGROUND The number of published studies and systematic reviews examining different telehealth interventions targeting patients and their effects on patients’ well-being and quality of life have grown in recent decades. However, the use of telemedicine tools aimed at the family members and caregivers of adult cancer patients is less defined. OBJECTIVE We aimed to conduct a systematic review to provide a more complete picture regarding telemedicine tools for informal caregivers (usually family members or close friends) implemented in all phases of cancer care. More specifically, the review aimed to better describe the study samples’ characteristics, to analyze measured outcomes and the specific questionnaires used to assess them, and to describe in depth the implemented interventions and their formats. Finally, we examined the role of telehealth, and usability and feasibility trends in supporting patients’ caregivers. METHODS We systematically searched the literature in the following databases: Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and PsycINFO. Inclusion criteria were being written in English, published in peer-reviewed journals, describing a telehealth-implemented intervention, and focusing on caregivers of adult cancer patients at any stage of the disease. We selected studies published up to November 2017. We critically appraised included articles using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and graded the quality of evidence by outcome using the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine framework. RESULTS We included 24 studies in the final selection. In 21 of the 24 studies, the patient-caregiver dyad was analyzed, and the study population dealt with different types of cancer at different stages. Included studies considered the caregiver’s condition from both an individual and a relational point of view. Along with psychosocial variables, some studies monitored engagement and user satisfaction regarding Web-based platforms or telehealth interventions. All studies reported significant improvements in some of the investigated areas, but they often showed small effect sizes. Two types of telehealth intervention formats were used: Web-based platforms and telephone calls. Some of the included studies referred to the same project, but on study samples with different cancer diagnoses or with new versions of previously developed interventions. CONCLUSIONS Reported outcomes seem to suggest that we are in an exploratory phase. More detailed and targeted research hypotheses are still needed. Clarifying caregivers’ needs related to telehealth tools and better defining outcome measures may yield more significant results.

scholarly journals The development and evaluation of an online application to assist in the extraction of data from graphs for use in systematic reviews

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 157
Author(s):  
Fala Cramond ◽  
Alison O'Mara-Eves ◽  
Lee Doran-Constant ◽  
Andrew SC Rice ◽  
Malcolm Macleod ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Online Application ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Graphical Data ◽  
Data Extraction Tool ◽  
Increase In Accuracy

Background: The extraction of data from the reports of primary studies, on which the results of systematic reviews depend, needs to be carried out accurately. To aid reliability, it is recommended that two researchers carry out data extraction independently. The extraction of statistical data from graphs in PDF files is particularly challenging, as the process is usually completely manual, and reviewers need sometimes to revert to holding a ruler against the page to read off values: an inherently time-consuming and error-prone process. Methods: To mitigate some of the above problems we developed a new web-based graphical data extraction tool to assist reviewers in extracting data from graphs. This tool aims to facilitate more accurate and timely data extraction through a user interface which can be used to extract data through mouse clicks. We carried out a non-inferiority evaluation to examine its performance in comparison to standard practice. Results: We found that our new graphical data extraction tool is not inferior to users’ prior preferred current approaches. Our study was not designed to show superiority, but suggests that there may be a saving in time of around 6 minutes per graph, accompanied by a substantial increase in accuracy. Conclusions: Our study suggests that the incorporation of this type of tool in online systematic review software would be beneficial in facilitating the production of accurate and timely evidence synthesis to improve decision-making.

scholarly journals P307 Guideline Development Tool (GDT) – Web-Based Solution For Guideline Developers And Authors Of Systematic Reviews

2013 ◽  
Vol 22 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 82.2-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Brozek ◽  
E Akl ◽  
Y Falck-Ytter ◽  
P Kunstman ◽  
J Meerpohl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Development Tool

scholarly journals Collaboration challenges in systematic reviews: a survey of health sciences librarians

2017 ◽  
Vol 105 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joey Nicholson ◽  
Aileen McCrillis ◽  
Jeff D. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Whole Process ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
General Communication

Objective: While many librarians have been asked to participate in systematic reviews with researchers, often these researchers are not familiar with the systematic review process or the appropriate role for librarians. The purpose of this study was to identify the challenges and barriers that librarians face when collaborating on systematic reviews. To take a wider view of the whole process of collaborating on systematic reviews, the authors deliberately focused on interpersonal and methodological issues other than searching itself.Methods: To characterize the biggest challenges that librarians face while collaborating on systematic review projects, we used a web-based survey. The thirteen-item survey included seventeen challenges grouped into two categories: methodological and interpersonal. Participants were required to indicate the frequency and difficulty of the challenges listed. Open-ended questions allowed survey participants to describe challenges not listed in the survey and to describe strategies used to overcome challenges.Results: Of the 17 challenges listed in the survey, 8 were reported as common by over 40% of respondents. These included methodological issues around having too broad or narrow research questions, lacking eligibility criteria, having unclear research questions, and not following established methods. The remaining challenges were interpersonal, including issues around student-led projects and the size of the research team. Of the top 8 most frequent challenges, 5 were also ranked as most difficult to handle. Open-ended responses underscored many of the challenges included in the survey and revealed several additional challenges.Conclusions: These results suggest that the most frequent and challenging issues relate to development of the research question and general communication with team members. Clear protocols for collaboration on systematic reviews, as well as a culture of mentorship, can help librarians prevent and address these challenges.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document