Dataset Information

Accumulating research: a systematic account of how cumulative meta-analyses would have provided knowledge, improved health, reduced harm and saved resources.

ABSTRACT: "Cumulative meta-analysis" describes a statistical procedure to calculate, retrospectively, summary estimates from the results of similar trials every time the results of a further trial in the series had become available. In the early 1990 s, comparisons of cumulative meta-analyses of treatments for myocardial infarction with advice promulgated through medical textbooks showed that research had continued long after robust estimates of treatment effects had accumulated, and that medical textbooks had overlooked strong, existing evidence from trials. Cumulative meta-analyses have subsequently been used to assess what could have been known had new studies been informed by systematic reviews of relevant existing evidence and how waste might have been reduced.We used a systematic approach to identify and summarise the findings of cumulative meta-analyses of studies of the effects of clinical interventions, published from 1992 to 2012. Searches were done of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Methodology Register and Science Citation Index. A total of 50 eligible reports were identified, including more than 1,500 cumulative meta-analyses. A variety of themes are illustrated with specific examples. The studies showed that initially positive results became null or negative in meta-analyses as more trials were done; that early null or negative results were over-turned; that stable results (beneficial, harmful and neutral) would have been seen had a meta-analysis been done before the new trial; and that additional trials had been much too small to resolve the remaining uncertainties.This large, unique collection of cumulative meta-analyses highlights how a review of the existing evidence might have helped researchers, practitioners, patients and funders make more informed decisions and choices about new trials over decades of research. This would have led to earlier uptake of effective interventions in practice, less exposure of trial participants to less effective treatments, and reduced waste resulting from unjustified research.

SUBMITTER: Clarke M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4113310 | biostudies-other | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Accumulating research: a systematic account of how cumulative meta-analyses would have provided knowledge, improved health, reduced harm and saved resources.

Clarke Mike M Brice Anne A Chalmers Iain I

PloS one 20140728 7

<h4>Background</h4>"Cumulative meta-analysis" describes a statistical procedure to calculate, retrospectively, summary estimates from the results of similar trials every time the results of a further trial in the series had become available. In the early 1990 s, comparisons of cumulative meta-analyses of treatments for myocardial infarction with advice promulgated through medical textbooks showed that research had continued long after robust estimates of treatment effects had accumulated, and th ...[more]

PMID: 25068257

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundChronic subdural haematoma (CSDH) is becoming increasingly prevalent, due to an aging population with increasing risk factors. Due to its variable disease course and high morbidity, patient centred care and shared decision making are essential. However, its occurrence in frail populations, remote from specialist neurosurgeons who currently triage treatment decisions, challenges this. Education is an important component of enabling shared decisions. This should be targeted to avoid information overload. However, it is unknown what this should be.ObjectivesOur objectives were to conduct analysis of the content of existing CSDH educational materials, to inform the development of patient and relative educational resources to facilitate shared decision making.MethodsA literature search was conducted (July 2021) of MEDLINE, Embase and grey literature, for all self-specified resources on CSDH education, and narrative reviews. Resources were classified into a hierarchical framework using inductive thematic analysis into 8 core domains: Aetiology, epidemiology and pathophysiology; natural history and risk factors; symptoms; diagnosis; surgical management; nonsurgical management; complications and recurrence; and outcomes. Domain provision was summarised using descriptive statistics and Chi-squared tests.Results56 information resources were identified. 30 (54%) were resources designed for healthcare professionals (HCPs), and 26 (46%) were patient-orientated resources. 45 (80%) were specific to CSDH, 11 (20%) covered head injury, and 10 (18%) referenced both acute and chronic SDH. Of 8 core domains, the most reported were aetiology, epidemiology and pathophysiology (80%, n = 45) and surgical management (77%, n = 43). Patient orientated resources were more likely to provide information on symptoms (73% vs 13%, p<0.001); and diagnosis (62% vs 10%, p<0.001) when compared to HCP resources. Healthcare professional orientated resources were more likely to provide information on nonsurgical management (63% vs 35%, p = 0.032), and complications/recurrence (83% vs 42%, p = 0.001).ConclusionThe content of educational resources is varied, even amongst those intended for the same audience. These discrepancies indicate an uncertain educational need, that will need to be resolved in order to better support effective shared decision making. The taxonomy created can inform future qualitative studies.

Project description:COVID-19 is a global pandemic that affected the everyday life activities of billions around the world. It is an unprecedented crisis that the modern world had never experienced before. It mainly affected the economic state and the health care system. The rapid and increasing number of infected patients overwhelmed the healthcare infrastructure, which causes high demand and, thus, shortage in the required staff members and medical resources. This shortage necessitates practical and ethical suggestions to guide clinicians and medical centers when allocating and reallocating scarce resources for and between COVID-19 patients. Many studies proposed a set of ethical principles that should be applied and implemented to address this problem. In this study, five different ethical principles based on the most commonly recommended principles and aligned with WHO guidelines and state-of-the-art practices proposed in the literature were identified, and recommendations for their applications were discussed. Furthermore, a recent study highlighted physicians' propensity to apply a combination of more than one ethical principle while prioritizing the medical resource allocation. Based on that, an ethical framework that is based on Fuzzy inference systems was proposed. The proposed framework's input is the identified ethical principles, and the output is a weighted value (per patient). This value can be used as a rank or a priority factor given to the patients based on their condition and other relevant information, like the severity of their disease status. The main idea of implementing fuzzy logic in the framework is to combine more than one principle when calculating the weighted value, hence mimicking what some physicians apply in practice. Moreover, the framework's rules are aligned with the identified ethical principles. This framework can help clinicians and guide them while making critical decisions to allocate/reallocate the limited medical resources during the current COVID-19 crisis and future similar pandemics.

Dataset Information

Accumulating research: a systematic account of how cumulative meta-analyses would have provided knowledge, improved health, reduced harm and saved resources.

Publications

Accumulating research: a systematic account of how cumulative meta-analyses would have provided knowledge, improved health, reduced harm and saved resources.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets