Abstract
Recently there has been a significant increase in the number of systematic reviews addressing questions of prevalence. Key features of a systematic review include the creation of an a priori protocol, clear inclusion criteria, a structured and systematic search process, critical appraisal of studies, and a formal process of data extraction followed by methods to synthesize, or combine, this data. Currently there exists no standard method for conducting critical appraisal of studies in systematic reviews of prevalence data. A working group was created to assess current critical appraisal tools for studies reporting prevalence data and develop a new tool for these studies in systematic reviews of prevalence. Following the development of this tool it was piloted amongst an experienced group of sixteen healthcare researchers. The results of the pilot found that this tool was a valid approach to assessing the methodological quality of studies reporting prevalence data to be included in systematic reviews. Participants found the tool acceptable and easy to use. Some comments were provided which helped refine the criteria. The results of this pilot study found that this tool was well-accepted by users and further refinements have been made to the tool based on their feedback. We now put forward this tool for use by authors conducting prevalence systematic reviews.
Highlights
The prevalence of a disease indicates the number of people in a population that have the disease at a given point in time [1]
Key features of a systematic review include the creation of an a priori protocol, clear inclusion criteria, a comprehensive and systematic search process, the critical appraisal of studies, and a formal process of data extraction followed by methods to synthesize, or combine, this data [4]
Prevalence data can be sourced from various study designs, even randomized controlled trials [11]; critical appraisal tools directed at assessing the risk of bias of randomized controlled trials are aimed at assessing biases related to causal effects and are not appropriate for reviews examining the prevalence
Summary
The prevalence of a disease indicates the number of people in a population that have the disease at a given point in time [1]. Key features of a systematic review include the creation of an a priori protocol, clear inclusion criteria, a comprehensive and systematic search process, the critical appraisal of studies, and a formal process of data extraction followed by methods to synthesize, or combine, this data [4]. In this way, systematic reviews extend beyond the subjective, narrative reporting characteristics of a traditional literature review to provide a comprehensive, rigorous, and transparent synthesis of the literature on a certain topic. Whilst some reviews used instruments that were appropriate for reviews of prevalence data [9,10], others used instruments or criteria not designed to critically appraise studies reporting prevalence (such as reporting guidelines, study design specific tools, or self-developed criteria for their review question) [11,12,13], or refrained from conducting a
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Health Policy and Management
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
