Abstract
Objectives: This systematic review aimed to identify the characteristics and application of citation analyses in evaluating the justification, design, and placement of the research results of clinical health studies in the context of earlier similar studies. Study Design and Setting: We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and the Cochrane Methodology Register for meta-research studies. We included meta-research studies assessing whether researchers used earlier similar studies and/or systematic reviews of such studies to inform the justification or design of a new study, whether researchers used systematic reviews to inform the interpretation of new results, and meta-research studies assessing whether redundant studies were published within a specific area. The results are presented as a narrative synthesis. Results: A total of 27 studies were included. How authors of citation analyses define their outcomes appears rather arbitrary, as does how the reference of a landmark review or adherence to reporting guidelines was expected to contribute to the initiation, justification, design, or contextualization of relevant clinical trials. Conclusion: Continued and improved efforts to promote evidence-based research are needed, including clearly defined and justified outcomes in meta-research studies to monitor the implementation of an evidence-based approach.
| Originalsprog | Engelsk |
|---|---|
| Tidsskrift | Journal of Clinical Epidemiology |
| Vol/bind | 150 |
| Sider (fra-til) | 126-141 |
| ISSN | 0895-4356 |
| DOI | |
| Status | Udgivet - okt. 2022 |
Bibliografisk note
Funding Information:This article/publication is based upon work from COST Action “EVBRES” (CA 17117), supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology).
Funding Information:
This article/publication is based upon work from COST Action “EVBRES” (CA 17117), supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology). This work has been prepared as part of the Evidence-Based Research Network (ebrnetwork.org). The Evidence-Based Research Network is an international network that promotes the use of systematic reviews when prioritizing, designing, and interpreting research. The authors thank the Section for Evidence-Based Practice, Department for Health and Function, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences for their generous support of the EBRNetwork. Furthermore, thanks to COST Association for supporting the COST Action “EVBRES” (CA 17117, evbres.eu) and thereby the preparation of this study. Thanks to Gunhild Austrheim, Head of Unit, Library at Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Norway, for helping with the second search. Thanks to those helping with the screening: Durita Gunnarsson, Gorm Høj Jensen, Line Sjodsholm, Signe Versterre, Linda Baumbach, Karina Johansen, Rune Martens Andersen, and Thomas Aagaard. We also gratefully acknowledge the contribution from the EVBRES core group (A COST Action), including Ane Gjerland and her specific contribution to the search and screening process. Declaration of interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this article. Author Contributions: Birgitte Nørgaard: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, writing–original draft, and writing–review and editing. Dawid Pieper: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, writing–original draft, and writing–review and editing. Matthias Briel: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, writing–review and editing. Stavri Chrysostomou: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, and writing–review and editing. Danijela Ristic Medic: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, software, validation, and writing–review and editing. Sandra C Buttigieg: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, and writing–review and editing. Ele Kiisk: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, and writing–review and editing. Livia Puljak: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, software, validation, and writing–review and editing. Malgorzata Bala: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, and writing–review and editing. Tina Poklepovic Pericic: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, and writing–review and editing. Wiktoria Lesniak: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, software, validation, and writing–review and editing. Joanna Zając: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, software, validation, and writing–review and editing. Hans Lund: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, Funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, supervision, validation, and writing–review and editing.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors