Introduction to Systematic Reviews of Disability and Rehabilitation Interventions 3.0

Definitions A Systematic Review is “The application of procedures that limit bias in the assembly, critical appraisal, and synthesis of all relevant studies on a particular topic. Meta analysis may be but is not necessarily part of the process.” (Chalmers et al. 2002)

Definitions A meta-analysis is defined as: “The statistical synthesis of the data from separate but comparable studies leading to a quantitative summary of the pooled results.” (Chalmers et al )

Definitions A Systematic Review Production Model is defined as: The systematic and replicable organization of human and financial resources to achieve efficiency, cost effectiveness, and economies of scale in producing systematic reviews. (Turner et al., 2006)

Methods Developed Target List of Organizations Developed Target List of Organizations Inclusion Criteria: SR as core or important Inclusion Criteria: SR as core or important Personnel Communication Personnel Communication - Phone calls - s Literature Search Literature Search

Results

Results Identified 18 organizations Divided data collection into two Rounds Report results from Round One

Organizations & Data Collection Round 1 Round 2 1. Cochrane Collaboration (UK) 12. Policy Hub (UK) 2. EPPI Centre (UK)* 13. UK Home Office (UK) 3. CRD (UK) 14. Dept of ED. & Skills (UK) 4. Campbell Collaboration (US) Nordic Campbell Center (NOR) Nordic Campbell Center (NOR) 15. Social Science Institute for Excellence (UK) 5. WWC (USA) 16. NICE (UK) 6. CSLP (Canada) 17. GAO (USA) 7. Blueprints for Violence (US) 18. CDC (USA) 8. NREPP (US) SCTA (Sweden) CERM (US) Joanna Briggs Institute (AU)* 22.

Organizations Identified CountryN United Kingdom 3 (5) United States 5 (2) Canada1 Norway1 Australia1 Sweden1 Note. Numbers in parenthesis count organizations that will be included in round two of data collection.

Development of the Field of Systematic Reviewing C2 1988CSLP1993C1EPPI 1994CRD1995JBI 1999CERM 2002WWC SCTA Outside US: (Sweden, CA, UK, AU) 1 Inside US BVP(US) 1 Not shown are organizations that will be included in round 2 of data collection: CDC GAO, Policy Hub, UK Home Office, DE&S, SSIE, and NICE.

Types of Organizations Review Organizations (n = 11) Contract (n = 8) Health (n = 4) Social(n=4) Interest (n = 3) Health (n = 2) Social (n = 1) Most organizations were government funded Most organizations were government funded Most organizations conduct contract reviews Most organizations conduct contract reviews Cochrane, Campbell, and Briggs conduct “interest” reviews Cochrane, Campbell, and Briggs conduct “interest” reviews

Typical Review Team (whether Interest or Contract) Information Specialist Information Specialist At Least Two Reviewers At Least Two Reviewers Users* Users* Statistical Consultant* Statistical Consultant* Accountability Support

The General Stages of a Review 1. Formulate review questions 2. Define inclusion and exclusion criteria * 3. Locate studies 4. Select studies 5. Assess study quality * 6. Extract data 7. Analyze and present results * 8. Interpret results * In Stages 2, 5, and 7 there is substantial variability across (and within) organizations.

The NC2 Project Plan: Ingredients for a Pricing Model ProcessReviewTeam Research Assistants Title Registration 4 weeks 40 hours 4 hours Protocol Development 14 weeks 28 hours 18 hours Protocol Review 8 weeks 130 hours 0 hours Locate, code, & screen studies 6 weeks 60 hours 177 hours Analysis 10 weeks 100 hours 0 hours Interpretation 172 hours 4 hours Approval 8 weeks 8 weeks 120 hours 0 hours Total 50 weeks 650 hours 203 hours