- •Challenges for evidence synthesis include time demands, duplication and waste.
- •Comparative effectiveness reviews have particularly intense time and resource demands.
- •A collaborative review can produce high-quality comparative evidence more efficiently.
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
- Growth rates of modern science: a bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references.JASIST. 2015; 66: 2215-2222
- Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK2019
- Systematic review automation technologies.Syst Rev. 2014; 3: 74
- Living systematic reviews: an emerging opportunity to narrow the evidence-practice gap.PLoS Med. 2014; 11: e1001603
- Wasted research when systematic reviews fail to provide a complete and up-to-date evidence synthesis: the example of lung cancer.BMC Med. 2016; 14: 8
- Evidence synthesis for decision making 7: a reviewer’s checklist.Med Decis Making. 2013; 33: 679-691
- Following 411 Cochrane protocols to completion: a retrospective cohort study.PLoS One. 2008; 3: e3684
- Factors predicting completion and time to publication of Cochrane reviews.Open Med. 2009; 3: e210-e214
- Producing Cochrane systematic reviews—a qualitative study of current approaches and opportunities for innovation and improvement.Syst Rev. 2017; 6: 147
- Overlapping meta-analyses on the same topic: survey of published studies.BMJ. 2013; 347: f4501
- A call for researchers to join the META-MICROBLEEDS Consortium.Lancet Neurol. 2016; 15: 900
- 2015 updated method guideline for systematic reviews in the Cochrane back and neck group.Spine. 2015; 40: 1660-1673
- The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.J Clin Epidemiol. 2009; 62: e1-e34
- Multivariate and network meta-analysis of multiple outcomes and multiple treatments: rationale, concepts, and examples.BMJ. 2017; 358: j3932
- DistillerSR. Evidence Partners, Ottawa, ON2020
- Resource use during systematic review production varies widely: a scoping review.J Clin Epidemiol. 2021; 139: 287-296
- Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing and publication of scholarly work in medical journals.(Available at)http://www.ICMJE.orgDate accessed: September 20, 2022
Publication stageIn Press Journal Pre-Proof
Funding: The Canadian Institutes of Health Research provided funding for this project (Project Grant Competition, PJT-173478 ). MLF holds a National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia Investigator Fellowship.
Conflict of interest: Jill A Hayden and Collaborative Review Working Group members report no other known competing interests.
Data sharing: Not relevant.