ArticleJournal of clinical epidemiology2022
Methodological challenges for living systematic reviews conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic: A concept paper.
Article in Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- It is Not Only About Staying Alive: A Living Systematic Review of Social Care Strategies for Older Adults in Residential Care Facilities During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of social work (London, England) · 2026Article
- Cochrane's COVID-19 Living Systematic Reviews: A Mixed-Methods Study of Their Conduct, Reporting and Currency.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2025Article
- Article
- Extension of the PRISMA 2020 statement for living systematic reviews (PRISMA-LSR): checklist and explanation.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Article
- A living critical interpretive synthesis to yield a framework on the production and dissemination of living evidence syntheses for decision-making.Implementation science : IS · 2024Review
- Building a sharable literature collection to advance the science and practice of implementation facilitation.Frontiers in health services · 2024Article
- Living health technology assessments: how close to living reality?BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2023Article
- Proposed triggers for retiring a living systematic review.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2023Article
- How to update a living systematic review and keep it alive during a pandemic: a practical guide.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Pragmatic and open science-based solution to a current problem in the reporting of living systematic reviews.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2023Article
- Methodological quality and reporting quality of COVID-19 living systematic review: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- [Concepts to support dynamic updating processes of guidelines and their practical implementation-Systematic literature review].Der Nervenarzt · 2023Review
- Review
- When we shouldn't borrow information from an existing network of trials for planning a new trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- [Evidence syntheses in public health: An overview].Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen · 2022Article
- Community engagement to support COVID-19 vaccine uptake: a living systematic review protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Lessons learnt: Undertaking rapid reviews on public health and social measures during a global pandemic.Research synthesis methods · 2022Review
- Extension of the PRISMA 2020 statement for living systematic reviews (LSRs): protocol.F1000Research · 2022Article
- Characteristics of Living Systematic Review for COVID-19.Clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA living systematic review (LSR) is an emerging review type that makes use of continual updating. In the COVID-19 pandemic, we were confronted with a shifting epidemiological landscape, clinical uncertainties and evolving evidence. These unexpected challenges compelled us to amend standard LSR methodology. OBJECTIVE AND OUTLINE: Our primary objective is to discuss some challenges faced when conducting LSRs in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to provide methodological guidance for others doing similar work. Based on our experience and lessons learned from two Cochrane LSRs and challenges identified in several non-Cochrane LSRs, we highlight methodological considerations, particularly with regards to the study design, interventions and comparators, changes in outcome measure, and the search strategy. We discuss when to update, or rather when not to update the review, and the importance of transparency when reporting changes. LESSONS LEARNED AND
conclusionWe learned that a LSR is a very suitable review type for the pandemic context, even in the face of new methodological and clinical challenges. Our experience showed that the decision for updating a LSR depends not only on the evolving disease or emerging evidence, but also on the individual review question and the review teams' resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.