Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews in clinical decision-making: a systematic review
- PMID: 20953729
- PMCID: PMC3055967
- DOI: 10.1007/s11606-010-1506-7
Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews in clinical decision-making: a systematic review
Abstract
Background: Systematic reviews have the potential to inform clinical decisions, yet little is known about the impact of interventions on increasing the use of systematic reviews in clinical decision-making.
Purpose: To systematically review the evidence on the impact of interventions for seeking, appraising, and applying evidence from systematic reviews in decision-making by clinicians.
Data sources: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and LISA were searched from the earliest date available until July 2009.
Study selection and data extraction: Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion if the intervention intended to increase seeking, appraising, or applying evidence from systematic reviews by a clinician. Information about the study population, features of each intervention, methods used to measure the use of systematic reviews and those used to measure professional performance or health care outcomes, existence and use of statistical tests, study outcomes, and comparative data were extracted.
Data synthesis: A total of 8,104 titles and abstracts were reviewed, leading to retrieval of 189 full-text articles for assessment; five of these studies met all inclusion criteria. All five studies reported on professional performance behavior; none reported on patient health outcomes. One study reported positive outcomes in improving preventive care. Three studies focused on obstetrical care, with two reporting no impact on professional practice change, and one study reporting increases in the use of prophylactic oxytocin and episiotomy. One study found no improvement in the sealant rate of newly erupted molars among dentists in Scotland.
Limitations: The small number of studies available for examination indicates the difficulty in summarizing and identifying key aspects in successful strategies that encourage clinicians to use systematic reviews in decision-making. Other concerns lay in selective reporting and lack of blinding during data collection.
Conclusions: The limited empirical data render the strength of evidence weak for the effectiveness and types of interventions that encourage clinicians to use systematic reviews in clinical decision making.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article.
-
Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: a systematic review.Implement Sci. 2011 Apr 27;6:43. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-43. Implement Sci. 2011. PMID: 21524292 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881. Med J Aust. 2020. PMID: 33314144
-
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12. Early Hum Dev. 2020. PMID: 33036834
-
Screening for Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults: An Evidence Update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Internet].Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2020 Feb. Report No.: 19-05257-EF-1. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2020 Feb. Report No.: 19-05257-EF-1. PMID: 32129963 Free Books & Documents. Review.
Cited by
-
A usability study of two formats of a shortened systematic review for clinicians.BMJ Open. 2014 Dec 23;4(12):e005919. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005919. BMJ Open. 2014. PMID: 25537782 Free PMC article.
-
Improving the uptake of systematic reviews: a systematic review of intervention effectiveness and relevance.BMJ Open. 2014 Oct 16;4(10):e005834. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005834. BMJ Open. 2014. PMID: 25324321 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Implementation Strategies for Knowledge Products in Primary Health Care: Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.Interact J Med Res. 2022 Jul 11;11(2):e38419. doi: 10.2196/38419. Interact J Med Res. 2022. PMID: 35635786 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Implementation science in resource-poor countries and communities.Implement Sci. 2018 Dec 27;13(1):154. doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0847-1. Implement Sci. 2018. PMID: 30587195 Free PMC article.
-
Do stakeholders in wound care prefer evidence-based wound care products? A survey in the Netherlands.Int Wound J. 2012 Dec;9(6):624-32. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2011.00926.x. Epub 2012 Jan 17. Int Wound J. 2012. PMID: 22248355 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Buchan H. Gaps between best evidence and practice: causes for concern. Med J Aust. 2004;180(6 Suppl):S48–9. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous