ArticleCochrane evidence synthesis and methods2023
Development of the InSynQ checklist: A tool for planning and reporting the synthesis questions in systematic reviews of interventions.
Article in Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist-based regimens compared with metformin-based regimens for preventing cardiovascular disease in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the replicability of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of the effects of health interventions.Research synthesis methods · 2026Article
- Clinical research on homeopathic preparations: protocol template for a series of systematic reviews.Systematic reviews · 2026Article
- The Longevity of Mobile Apps for Cancer Recovery: Scoping Review.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors combination therapy for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Article
- Development of the InSynQ checklist: A tool for planning and reporting the synthesis questions in systematic reviews of interventions.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Methods guidance and appraisal tools for systematic reviews require specification of the question and eligibility criteria for the review ("PICO for the review"). Less emphasis has been given to specifying the question and criteria for each synthesis ("PICO for each synthesis"), yet decisions about which studies to include in each synthesis can critically influence the utility and findings of a review. This paper describes the rationale and methods for developing the InSynQ (Intervention Synthesis Questions) tool for planning and reporting synthesis questions in reviews of interventions. The aim is to provide transparency about the basis of the tool and contribute to evidence on methods for developing guidance for research conduct and reporting. Methods: Informed by EQUATOR Network methods, we (1) established a project group; (2) examined reporting of the "PICO for each synthesis" in published reviews; (3) reviewed existing reporting guidance and the Results: Existing reporting guidelines do not distinguish the review and synthesis PICO, with limited coverage of the elements needed to specify the PICO for each synthesis. Using the PRISMA 2020 format, the draft tool contained 10 items with essential and additional reporting elements, explanations, and examples. Revisions arising from consultation meetings (>30 people), included adding an eleventh item on consumer and stakeholder involvement, a figure explaining PICO for each synthesis, and integrating examples into elements/explanations. All respondents to the survey (12 people) said the tool would help them plan or appraise synthesis questions. InSynQ is available at https://InSynQ.info. Conclusion: Transparent reporting of the development process contributes to the evidence base for methods to develop guidance. It may improve uptake of InSynQ, in turn enhancing the clarity of syntheses.
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.