Types and associated methodologies of overviews of reviews in health care: a methodological study with published examples

Nebulized Antibiotics for Preventing and Treating Gram-Negative Respiratory Infections in Critically Ill Patients: An Overview of Reviews

BACKGROUND

Ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT) and pneumonia (VAP) are the most frequent nosocomial infections in the critical care setting and are associated with increased morbidity. At the same time, VAP is also associated with attributable mortality, especially when caused by difficult-to-treat (DTR) Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) that have limited treatment options. Studies have assessed the impact of nebulized aminoglycosides or colistin to improve VAT and VAP outcomes or as an adjunct to intravenous antimicrobial treatment or as a preventive approach.

OBJECTIVE

This overview aimed to assess systematic reviews that examine the efficacy and safety of antimicrobial nebulization for preventing and treating ventilator-associated infections in the critically ill.

METHODS

Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and original randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies were included. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane, Epistemonikos, and PROSPERO. The methodological quality assessment was performed using standardized tools.

RESULTS

Regarding VAP treatment, the included systematic reviews presented critically low quality. The clinical response effect size to amikacin and colistin nebulization were RR 1.23 (95% CI 1.13-1.34), I2 = 47% and OR 1.39 (0.87-2.20), I2 = 56%. The main safety concern was bronchospasm with RR 2.55 (1.40-4.66), I2 = 0% and OR 5.19 (1.05-25.52), I2 = 0%. The certainty of evidence was usually very low. For VAT treatment, limited evidence showed a better clinical response and less emergence of resistant bacteria. Regarding VAP prevention, data are limited to two trials; however, only the larger one presented a low risk of bias and resulted in a reduced VAP rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Delivery via nebulization might be considered in addition to IV antimicrobial treatment of GNB ventilator-associated infections. The available evidence is weak, and more studies focused on infections due to DTR-GNBs should be prioritized.

Estimates for diagnostic accuracy of rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 in systematic reviews are consistently similar despite poor methodological rigor: a methodological overview

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the design, conduct, and analysis of systematic reviews on the diagnostic accuracy of rapid antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We did a methodological overview of systematic reviews on diagnostic test accuracy, exploring methodological rigor, risk of bias and potential factors of between-review variability.

RESULTS

Of the 31 included reviews, 30 provided summary statistics for sensitivity and 29 for specificity. Summary sensitivities ranged from 56.2% to 91.1%, with a median of 71.5% (IQR 68.3%-76.6%) and a mean of 72.7% with a 7.2 SD. Reported summary specificity estimates were consistently high: median 99.5% (IQR 99%-99.9%) and a mean of 99.3% with a 0.9 SD. We found methodological shortcomings in the systematic reviews, with a majority showing critically low confidence in quality and a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

Despite significant methodological flaws in the reviews, the diagnostic accuracy estimates for rapid antigen tests were characterized by a strong central tendency, highlighting the importance of large sample sizes and broad participant representation. This study suggests the need for further research in diagnostic test accuracy assessments of rigor and risk of bias in systematic reviews.

Reporting of adverse events of treatment interventions in multiple myeloma: an overview of systematic reviews

The present study is an overview of systematic reviews focusing on adverse events of antimyeloma treatments. It provides a systematic description of adverse events as they are reported in the systematic reviews as well as a critical appraisal of included reviews. We conducted a comprehensive literature search in the most widely used electronic databases looking for systematic reviews that had an adverse event of an antimyeloma treatment intervention as primary outcome. Two independent reviewers conducted selection of included studies and data extraction on predesigned online forms and assessed study quality using AMSTAR 2. Overall corrected covered area (CCA) was calculated to examine the overlap of primary studies across systematic reviews. After screening eligible studies, 23 systematic reviews were included in this overview. Seven reviews with overall CCA of 14.7% examined cardiovascular adverse events of different drugs, including immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors (mainly carfilzomib). Nine focused on infections, presenting with overall CCA of 5.8%, each one focused on a different drug or drug class. Three studied thromboembolism in patients treated either with lenalidomide, any immunomodulatory drug, or with daratumumab and had an overall CCA equal to 1.5%. Four more reviews focused on bortezomib-associated neurotoxicity, carfilzomib-associated renal toxicity, or second primary malignancies as an adverse event of lenalidomide or anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody treatment. The quality of included studies as judged by AMSTAR 2 was mostly critically low. Absence of a priori registered protocol and formal assessment of risk of bias of included primary studies were the most common shortcomings. Reporting of antimyeloma drug-associated toxicity is supported by multiple systematic reviews; nevertheless, methodological quality of existing reviews is mostly low.

Lived experience and family engagement in psychiatry research: A scoping review of reviews

BACKGROUND

A growing body of research is addressing the process and science of engaging people with lived experience (PWLE) of mental health challenges and other psychiatric conditions, and family members, in research activities.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review of reviews synthesizes literature reviews on the engagement of PWLE and family members in research across the field of psychiatry.

METHOD

Systematic searches were conducted in seven bibliographic databases. Records were independently screened first at the title and abstract level, then at the full-text level. Included were any literature synthesis studies published in English, French, or Spanish in any given year, focusing on the engagement of PWLE and/or family members in research within psychiatry. Twenty records were included. Data were extracted in a spreadsheet and codebook thematic analysis was used across the body of articles to synthesize the findings.

RESULTS

Aspects of PWLE engagement have been synthesized in 20 review articles reviewing 376 articles across psychiatry as a whole and several subpopulations, including youth mental health, dementia, neurodevelopmental disorders, people who use drugs, and forensic mental health. Information specific to family engagement is lacking. Barriers, facilitators, and positive impacts of PWLE engagement have been widely reported across domains of research, with a considerable degree of consensus across subpopulations. Some negative impacts and reporting challenges have also been identified.

DISCUSSION

This scoping review of reviews provides an overarching understanding of the current state of the science of PWLE and family engagement across psychiatry research. The findings can inform future research practices enriched with a genuine and effective engagement with PWLE and families.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The authorship team includes members with intersecting lived experience and academic identities. Additional lived experience engagement was not conducted as part of this review.

amstar2Vis: An R package for presenting the critical appraisal of systematic reviews based on the items of AMSTAR 2

Systematic reviews (SRs) have an important role in the healthcare decision-making practice. Assessing the overall confidence in the results of SRs using quality assessment tools, such as "A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2" (AMSTAR 2), is crucial since not all SRs are conducted using the most rigorous methods. In this article, we introduce a free, open-source R package called "amstar2Vis" (https://github.com/bougioukas/amstar2Vis) that provides easy-to-use functions for presenting the critical appraisal of SRs, based on the items of AMSTAR 2 checklist. An illustrative example is outlined, describing the steps involved in creating a detailed table with the item ratings and the overall confidence ratings, generating a stacked bar plot that shows the distribution of ratings as percentages of SRs for each AMSTAR 2 item, and creating a "ggplot2" graph that shows the distribution of overall confidence ratings ("Critically Low," "Low," "Moderate," or "High"). We expect "amstar2Vis" to be useful for overview authors and methodologists who assess the quality of SRs with AMSTAR 2 checklist and facilitate the production of pertinent publication-ready tables and figures. Future research and applications could further investigate the functionality or potential improvements of our package.

Effectiveness and safety of injectable PCSK9 inhibitors in dyslipidaemias' treatment and cardiovascular disease prevention: An overview of 86 systematic reviews and a network metaanalysis

OBJECTIVE

Multiple systematic reviews (SR) have been performed on the effects of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i), often providing conflicting findings. This overview and network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to summarize SR findings on the efficacy and safety of PCSK9i and provide an updated NMA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE (Pubmed), Scopus, Cochrane, Epistemonikos and Google Scholar were searched from inception to September 21, 2023 for SRs of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and from January 1, 2020 to September 21, 2023 for additional RCTs. Double-independent study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed. Qualitative analysis was performed for SRs and a frequentist random-effects model NMA was performed for RCTs.

RESULTS

Totally, 86 SRs and 76 RCTs were included. Alirocumab (77/86 [90%]) and evolocumab (73/86 [85%]) were mostly analyzed. Associations from SRs (35/42 [83%]) and the updated NMA indicated PCSK9i benefit on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). Reductions were also noted for cerebrovascular events (47/66 [71%]), coronary revascularization (29/33 [88%]) and myocardial infarction (41/63 [65%]). Alirocumab was associated with reductions on all-cause mortality (RR=0.82, 95%CI [0.72,0.94]). Data on any CV event reduction were conflicting (7/16 [44%]). Inclisiran appeared effective only on MACEs (RR=0.76, 95%CI [0.61,0.94]). No reductions in heart failure were observed (0/16). No increases were identified between PCSK9i and any (0/35) or serious adverse events (0/52). However, PCSK9i were associated with injection-site reactions (20/28 [71%]).

CONCLUSION

PCSK9i appeared to be effective in CV outcomes and their clinical application was generally safe.

Overviews of reviews in the cardiovascular field underreported critical methodological and transparency characteristics: a methodological study based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR) statement

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the epidemiology, reporting characteristics, and adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR) statement of overviews of reviews (overviews) of interventions in the cardiovascular field.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from January 1, 2000, to October 15, 2020. An updated search was performed in MEDLINE, Epistemonikos, and Google Scholar up to August 25, 2022. Overviews of interventions published in English and primarily considering populations, interventions, and outcomes pertinent to the cardiovascular field were eligible. Study selection, data extraction, and PRIOR adherence assessment were performed by two authors independently.

RESULTS

We analyzed 96 overviews. Almost half (43/96 [45%]) were published between 2020 and 2022 and contained a median of 15 systematic reviews (SRs) (interquartile range, 9-28). The commonest title terminology was "overview of (systematic) reviews" (38/96 [40%]). Methods for handling SR overlap were reported in 24/96 (25%), methods for assessing primary study overlap in 18/96 (19%), handling of discrepant data in 11/96 (11%), and methods for methodological quality or risk of bias assessment of the primary studies within SRs in 23/96 (24%). Authors included data sharing statements in 28/96 (29%), complete funding disclosure in 43/96 (45%), protocol registration in 43/96 (45%), and conflict of interest statement in 82/96 (85%) overviews.

CONCLUSION

Insufficient reporting was identified in methodological characteristics unique in overviews' conduct and most transparency markers. Adoption of PRIOR from the research community could ameliorate overviews' reporting.