 |
 |
Hi All: Does anyone know if for a guideline topic there is a way to determine whether it is worth embarking on a systematic review at all, or whether it is better to directly turn to consensus of experts? As an example, at the Program in Evidence-Based Care (PEBC) we did several systematic reviews that ended up to be empty: although the experts thought there might have been something out there, at the end of the systematic reviews we could not find enough evidence at all to base our recommendations. This happened on a safety topic where incidents are rare but fatal, and out there is just case reports. Several (8.7%) Cochrane reviews end up empty too, and I was wondering if there is a quick way to determine what to expect before spending the time and energy to do the review. I know about studies that looked at horizon estimates, but that is a slightly different thing, and horizon estimates are resource intensive too. I explored the Cochrane empty review site http://empty-reviews.org/ but I could not see an answer to my question; although they mention that we need guidance in anticipating empty reviews, they don't expand on this. Perhaps someone has done work on this already... Any ideas? Thanks Fulvia Fulvia Baldassarre, RN, MSc. Research Coordinator Program in Evidence-based Care, Cancer Care Ontario McMaster University, Juravinski Hospital site G Wing, 2nd Floor, Rm 220 711 Concession Street, Hamilton, ON L8V 1C3 Telephone: 905- 527-4322 extension 42834 Fax: 905-526-6775 e-mail: [log in to unmask] http://www.cancercare.on.ca/toolbox/qualityguidelines/pebc/