Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35352103›Full record

ArticleJournal of public health (Oxford, England)2022

Strengthening systematic reviews in public health: guidance in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 2nd edition.

Miranda S Cumpston, Joanne E McKenzie, Vivian A Welch, Sue E Brennan

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of public health (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 250 papers, 102 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
250citing papers in PubMed, 102 pooled it
68.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

250 citing papers in PubMed, 102 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 395 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Transitioning to adolescent and young adult or adult cancer survivorship care: A systematic review of contemporary guidelines and trials.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

190 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Miranda S CumpstonCochrane Public Health, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW 2308, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6564-8615
Joanne E McKenzieMethods in Evidence Synthesis Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Vivian A WelchMethods Centre, Bruyère Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa K1N 6N5, Canada.
Sue E BrennanCochrane Australia, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Monash University · AUCochrane · GBUniversity of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsDecision makers in public health practice and policy rely on access to trustworthy, relevant, synthesized evidence. The second edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions ('the Handbook') reflects a major revision in guidance for authors of systematic reviews, incorporating a decade of methodological development and a number of significant changes to previous recommendations. This paper aims to highlight new guidance that addresses a number of key methodological challenges for authors of systematic reviews in public health.

resultsThe revised Handbook includes guidance on framing public health research questions for synthesis, considering equity, intervention complexity, risk of bias assessment and synthesis methods other than meta-analysis. Reviews of public health interventions frequently encounter the types of methodological complexity addressed in this new guidance.

conclusionWe hope that readers will find that the Cochrane Handbook includes detailed and thoughtful guidance on both conceptualizing and executing systematic reviews relevant to public health questions. Considering the available methods guidance will, we hope, provide support for authors of public health reviews to tackle the challenges they encounter, strengthen their analysis and provide useful answers to the important questions asked by stakeholders and users of public health evidence.

Indexed as

Public HealthPublic Health PracticeBiasHumansSystematic Reviews as Topicmethodspublic healthsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35352103
PMCPMC9715291
OpenAlexW4213435918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.