TY - JOUR
T1 - Practical guidance for using multiple data sources in systematic reviews and meta-analyses (with examples from the MUDS study)
AU - for the MUDS investigators
AU - Mayo-Wilson, Evan
AU - Li, Tianjing
AU - Fusco, Nicole
AU - Dickersin, Kay
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported by contract ME 1303 5785 from the Patient‐Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) and a fund established at Johns Hopkins for scholarly research on reporting biases by Greene LLP. The funders were not involved in the design or conduct of the study, manuscript preparation, or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2018/3
Y1 - 2018/3
N2 - Data for individual trials included in systematic reviews may be available in multiple sources. For example, a single trial might be reported in 2 journal articles and 3 conference abstracts. Because of differences across sources, source selection can influence the results of systematic reviews. We used our experience in the Multiple Data Sources in Systematic Reviews (MUDS) study, and evidence from previous studies, to develop practical guidance for using multiple data sources in systematic reviews. We recommend the following: (1) Specify which sources you will use. Before beginning a systematic review, consider which sources are likely to contain the most useful data. Try to identify all relevant reports and to extract information from the most reliable sources. (2) Link individual trials with multiple sources. Write to authors to determine which sources are likely related to the same trials. Use a modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) flowchart to document both the selection of trials and the selection of sources. (3) Follow a prespecified protocol for extracting trial characteristics from multiple sources. Identify differences among sources, and contact study authors to resolve differences if possible. (4) Prespecify outcomes and results to examine in the review and meta-analysis. In your protocol, describe how you will handle multiple outcomes within each domain of interest. Look for outcomes using all eligible sources. (5) Identify which data sources were included in the review. Consider whether the results might have been influenced by data sources used. (6) To reduce bias, and to reduce research waste, share the data used in your review.
AB - Data for individual trials included in systematic reviews may be available in multiple sources. For example, a single trial might be reported in 2 journal articles and 3 conference abstracts. Because of differences across sources, source selection can influence the results of systematic reviews. We used our experience in the Multiple Data Sources in Systematic Reviews (MUDS) study, and evidence from previous studies, to develop practical guidance for using multiple data sources in systematic reviews. We recommend the following: (1) Specify which sources you will use. Before beginning a systematic review, consider which sources are likely to contain the most useful data. Try to identify all relevant reports and to extract information from the most reliable sources. (2) Link individual trials with multiple sources. Write to authors to determine which sources are likely related to the same trials. Use a modified Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) flowchart to document both the selection of trials and the selection of sources. (3) Follow a prespecified protocol for extracting trial characteristics from multiple sources. Identify differences among sources, and contact study authors to resolve differences if possible. (4) Prespecify outcomes and results to examine in the review and meta-analysis. In your protocol, describe how you will handle multiple outcomes within each domain of interest. Look for outcomes using all eligible sources. (5) Identify which data sources were included in the review. Consider whether the results might have been influenced by data sources used. (6) To reduce bias, and to reduce research waste, share the data used in your review.
KW - meta-analysis
KW - multiple data sources
KW - reporting bias
KW - risk of bias assessment
KW - selective outcome reporting
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041094950&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041094950&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/jrsm.1277
DO - 10.1002/jrsm.1277
M3 - Article
C2 - 29057573
AN - SCOPUS:85041094950
SN - 1759-2879
VL - 9
SP - 2
EP - 12
JO - Research Synthesis Methods
JF - Research Synthesis Methods
IS - 1
ER -