A prospective comparison of evidence synthesis search strategies developed with and without text-mining tools.

Objective: We compared the process of developing searches with and without using text-mining tools (TMTs) for evidence synthesis products.

Study Design: This descriptive comparative analysis included seven systematic reviews, classified as simple or complex. Two librarians created MEDLINE strategies for each review, using either usual practice (UP) or TMTs.

Improving the utility of evidence synthesis for decision makers in the face of insufficient evidence.

Objective: To identify and suggest strategies to make insufficient evidence ratings in systematic reviews more actionable.

Study Design And Setting: A workgroup comprising members from the Evidence-Based Practice (EPC) Program of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality convened throughout 2020. We conducted iterative discussions considering information from three data sources: a literature review for relevant publications and frameworks, a review of a convenience sample of past systematic reviews conducted by the EPCs, and an audit of methods used in past EPC technical briefs.