Taking account of context in systematic reviews and guidelines considering a complexity perspective

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard Standard

Taking account of context in systematic reviews and guidelines considering a complexity perspective. / Booth, Andrew; Moore, Graham; Flemming, Kate et al.
In: BMJ Global Health, Vol. 4, No. Suppl 1, 25.01.2019, p. e000840.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

HarvardHarvard

Booth, A, Moore, G, Flemming, K, Garside, R, Rollins, N, Tunçalp, Ö & Noyes, J 2019, 'Taking account of context in systematic reviews and guidelines considering a complexity perspective', BMJ Global Health, vol. 4, no. Suppl 1, pp. e000840. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000840

APA

Booth, A., Moore, G., Flemming, K., Garside, R., Rollins, N., Tunçalp, Ö., & Noyes, J. (2019). Taking account of context in systematic reviews and guidelines considering a complexity perspective. BMJ Global Health, 4(Suppl 1), e000840. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000840

CBE

Booth A, Moore G, Flemming K, Garside R, Rollins N, Tunçalp Ö, Noyes J. 2019. Taking account of context in systematic reviews and guidelines considering a complexity perspective. BMJ Global Health. 4(Suppl 1):e000840. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000840

MLA

VancouverVancouver

Booth A, Moore G, Flemming K, Garside R, Rollins N, Tunçalp Ö et al. Taking account of context in systematic reviews and guidelines considering a complexity perspective. BMJ Global Health. 2019 Jan 25;4(Suppl 1):e000840. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000840

Author

Booth, Andrew ; Moore, Graham ; Flemming, Kate et al. / Taking account of context in systematic reviews and guidelines considering a complexity perspective. In: BMJ Global Health. 2019 ; Vol. 4, No. Suppl 1. pp. e000840.

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Taking account of context in systematic reviews and guidelines considering a complexity perspective

AU - Booth, Andrew

AU - Moore, Graham

AU - Flemming, Kate

AU - Garside, Ruth

AU - Rollins, Nigel

AU - Tunçalp, Özge

AU - Noyes, Jane

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 - Systematic review teams and guideline development groups face considerable challenges when considering context within the evidence production process. Many complex interventions are context-dependent and are frequently evaluated within considerable contextual variation and change. This paper considers the extent to which current tools used within systematic reviews and guideline development are suitable in meeting these challenges. The paper briefly reviews strengths and weaknesses of existing approaches to specifying context. Illustrative tools are mapped to corresponding stages of the systematic review process. Collectively, systematic review and guideline production reveals a rich diversity of frameworks and tools for handling context. However, current approaches address only specific elements of context, are derived from primary studies which lack information or have not been tested within systematic reviews. A hypothetical example is used to illustrate how context could be integrated throughout the guideline development process. Guideline developers and evidence synthesis organisations should select an appropriate level of contextual detail for their specific guideline that is parsimonious and yet sensitive to health systems contexts and the values, preferences and needs of their target populations.

AB - Systematic review teams and guideline development groups face considerable challenges when considering context within the evidence production process. Many complex interventions are context-dependent and are frequently evaluated within considerable contextual variation and change. This paper considers the extent to which current tools used within systematic reviews and guideline development are suitable in meeting these challenges. The paper briefly reviews strengths and weaknesses of existing approaches to specifying context. Illustrative tools are mapped to corresponding stages of the systematic review process. Collectively, systematic review and guideline production reveals a rich diversity of frameworks and tools for handling context. However, current approaches address only specific elements of context, are derived from primary studies which lack information or have not been tested within systematic reviews. A hypothetical example is used to illustrate how context could be integrated throughout the guideline development process. Guideline developers and evidence synthesis organisations should select an appropriate level of contextual detail for their specific guideline that is parsimonious and yet sensitive to health systems contexts and the values, preferences and needs of their target populations.

U2 - 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000840

DO - 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000840

M3 - Article

C2 - 30775011

VL - 4

SP - e000840

JO - BMJ Global Health

JF - BMJ Global Health

SN - 2059-7908

IS - Suppl 1

ER -