A surveillance system to assess the need for updating systematic reviews
Article 2013 en
Authors
NA
Nadera Ahmadzai
SN
Sydne J Newberry
MM
Margaret Maglione
Abstract
1 min read
In this system of regular surveillance of 24 systematic reviews on a variety of clinical interventions produced by a leading organization, about 70% of reviews were determined to have a low priority for updating. Evidence suggests that the time period for surveillance is yearly rather than the six months used in this project.
Matthew J. Page, Joanne E. McKenzie, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Isabelle Boutron, Tammy Hoffmann, Cynthia D. Mulrow, Larissa Shamseer, Jennifer Tetzlaff, David Moher
Paul G Shekelle, Sydne J Newberry, Helen Wu, Marika J Suttorp, Aneesa Motala, Yee-Wei Lim, Ethan M. Balk, Mei Chung, Winifred W Yu, Jounghee Lee, James M Gaylor, David Moher, Mohammed Ansari, Rebecca Skidmore, Chantelle Garritty
Beverley Shea, Barnaby C Reeves, George A. Wells, Micere Thuku, Candyce Hamel, Julian Moran, David Moher, Peter Tugwell, Vivian Welch, Elizabeth Kristjansson, David Henry
.webp){kind=small}
Discussion(0)
No comments yet. Be the first to comment.