期刊
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 98, 期 -, 页码 98-104出版社
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.01.007
关键词
Harms; Systematic reviews; Comparative effectiveness review; Study methodology; Recommendations; Adverse effects
资金
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [HHSA 290 2015 000091, HHSA 290 2015 000021, HHSA 290 2015 000121, HHSA 290 2015 000041, HHSA 290 2015 000061, HHSA 290 2015 000081, HHSA 290 2015 000101, HHSA 290 2015 000031, HHSA 290-2012-0004-C]
Objectives: Systematic reviews should provide balanced assessments of benefits and harms, while focusing on the most important outcomes. Selection of harms to be reviewed can be a challenge due to the potential for large numbers of diverse harms. Study Design and Setting: A workgroup of methodologists from Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPCs) developed consensus-based guidance on selection and prioritization of harms in systematic reviews. Recommendations were informed by a literature scan, review of Evidence-based Practice Center reports, and interviews with experts in conducting reviews or assessing harms and persons representing organizations that commission or use systematic reviews. Results: Ten recommendations were developed on selection and prioritization of harms, including routinely focusing on serious as well as less serious but frequent or bothersome harms; routinely engaging stakeholders and using literature searches and other data sources to identify important harms; using a prioritization process (formal or less formal) to inform selection decisions; and describing the methods used to select and prioritize harms. Conclusion: We provide preliminary guidance for a more structured approach to selection and prioritization of harms in systematic reviews. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据