Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making

Allbwn ymchwil: Cyfraniad at gyfnodolynErthygladolygiad gan gymheiriaid

StandardStandard

Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making. / Petticrew, Mark; Knai, Cécile; Thomas, James et al.
Yn: BMJ Global Health, Cyfrol 4, Rhif Suppl 1, 25.01.2019, t. e000899.

Allbwn ymchwil: Cyfraniad at gyfnodolynErthygladolygiad gan gymheiriaid

HarvardHarvard

Petticrew, M, Knai, C, Thomas, J, Rehfuess, EA, Noyes, J, Gerhardus, A, Grimshaw, JM, Rutter, H & McGill, E 2019, 'Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making', BMJ Global Health, cyfrol. 4, rhif Suppl 1, tt. e000899. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000899

APA

Petticrew, M., Knai, C., Thomas, J., Rehfuess, E. A., Noyes, J., Gerhardus, A., Grimshaw, J. M., Rutter, H., & McGill, E. (2019). Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making. BMJ Global Health, 4(Suppl 1), e000899. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000899

CBE

Petticrew M, Knai C, Thomas J, Rehfuess EA, Noyes J, Gerhardus A, Grimshaw JM, Rutter H, McGill E. 2019. Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making. BMJ Global Health. 4(Suppl 1):e000899. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000899

MLA

VancouverVancouver

Petticrew M, Knai C, Thomas J, Rehfuess EA, Noyes J, Gerhardus A et al. Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making. BMJ Global Health. 2019 Ion 25;4(Suppl 1):e000899. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000899

Author

Petticrew, Mark ; Knai, Cécile ; Thomas, James et al. / Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making. Yn: BMJ Global Health. 2019 ; Cyfrol 4, Rhif Suppl 1. tt. e000899.

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making

AU - Petticrew, Mark

AU - Knai, Cécile

AU - Thomas, James

AU - Rehfuess, Eva Annette

AU - Noyes, Jane

AU - Gerhardus, Ansgar

AU - Grimshaw, Jeremy M

AU - Rutter, Harry

AU - McGill, Elizabeth

N1 - This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non commercial IGO License (CC BY-NC 3.0 IGO), which permits use, distribution,and reproduction for non-commercial purposes in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any reproduction of this article there should not be any suggestion that WHO or this article endorse any specific organization or products. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.

PY - 2019/1/25

Y1 - 2019/1/25

N2 - There is growing interest in the potential for complex systems perspectives in evaluation. This reflects a move away from interest in linear chains of cause-and-effect, towards considering health as an outcome of interlinked elements within a connected whole. Although systems-based approaches have a long history, their concrete implications for health decisions are still being assessed. Similarly, the implications of systems perspectives for the conduct of systematic reviews require further consideration. Such reviews underpin decisions about the implementation of effective interventions, and are a crucial part of the development of guidelines. Although they are tried and tested as a means of synthesising evidence on the effectiveness of interventions, their applicability to the synthesis of evidence about complex interventions and complex systems requires further investigation. This paper, one of a series of papers commissioned by the WHO, sets out the concrete methodological implications of a complexity perspective for the conduct of systematic reviews. It focuses on how review questions can be framed within a complexity perspective, and on the implications for the evidence that is reviewed. It proposes criteria which can be used to determine whether or not a complexity perspective will add value to a review or an evidence-based guideline, and describes how to operationalise key aspects of complexity as concrete research questions. Finally, it shows how these questions map onto specific types of evidence, with a focus on the role of qualitative and quantitative evidence, and other types of information.

AB - There is growing interest in the potential for complex systems perspectives in evaluation. This reflects a move away from interest in linear chains of cause-and-effect, towards considering health as an outcome of interlinked elements within a connected whole. Although systems-based approaches have a long history, their concrete implications for health decisions are still being assessed. Similarly, the implications of systems perspectives for the conduct of systematic reviews require further consideration. Such reviews underpin decisions about the implementation of effective interventions, and are a crucial part of the development of guidelines. Although they are tried and tested as a means of synthesising evidence on the effectiveness of interventions, their applicability to the synthesis of evidence about complex interventions and complex systems requires further investigation. This paper, one of a series of papers commissioned by the WHO, sets out the concrete methodological implications of a complexity perspective for the conduct of systematic reviews. It focuses on how review questions can be framed within a complexity perspective, and on the implications for the evidence that is reviewed. It proposes criteria which can be used to determine whether or not a complexity perspective will add value to a review or an evidence-based guideline, and describes how to operationalise key aspects of complexity as concrete research questions. Finally, it shows how these questions map onto specific types of evidence, with a focus on the role of qualitative and quantitative evidence, and other types of information.

U2 - 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000899

DO - 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000899

M3 - Article

C2 - 30775017

VL - 4

SP - e000899

JO - BMJ Global Health

JF - BMJ Global Health

SN - 2059-7908

IS - Suppl 1

ER -