Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing, and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review.

Background And Objective: The living systematic review (LSR) approach is based on ongoing surveillance of the literature and continual updating. Most currently available guidance documents address the conduct, reporting, publishing, and appraisal of systematic reviews (SRs), but are not suitable for LSRs per se and miss additional LSR-specific considerations. In this scoping review, we aim to systematically collate methodological guidance literature on how to conduct, report, publish, and appraise the quality of LSRs and identify current gaps in guidance.

The life and death of living systematic reviews: a methodological survey.

Objectives: The objectives of this study are to describe the characteristics of living systematic reviews (LSRs) and to understand their life cycles.

Study Design And Setting: We conducted a comprehensive search up to April 2021 then selected articles and abstracted data in duplicate and independently. We undertook descriptive analyses and calculated delay in version update and delay since the last published version.

Conceptualizing the reporting of living systematic reviews.

Objectives: As part of an effort to develop an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement for living systematic reviews (LSRs), we discuss conceptual issues relevant to the reporting of LSRs and highlight a few challenges.

Methods: Discussion of conceptual issues based on a scoping review of the literature and discussions among authors.

Results: We first briefly describe aspects of the LSR production process relevant to reporting.

Extension of the PRISMA 2020 statement for living systematic reviews (LSRs): protocol.

: While the PRISMA 2020 statement is intended to guide the reporting of original systematic reviews, updated systematic reviews, and living systematic reviews (LSRs), its explanation and elaboration document notes that additional considerations for updated systematic reviews and LSRs may need to be addressed. This paper reports the protocol for developing an extension of the PRISMA 2020 statement for LSRs. We will follow the EQUATOR Network's guidance for developing health research reporting guidelines.

Methods and guidance on conducting, reporting, publishing and appraising living systematic reviews: a scoping review protocol.

The living systematic review (LSR) approach is based on an ongoing surveillance of the literature and continual updating. A few guidance documents address the conduct, reporting, publishing and appraisal of systematic reviews (SRs), but the methodology described is either not up-to date or not suitable for LSRs and misses additional LSR-specific considerations. The objective of this scoping review is to systematically collate methodological literature and guidance on how to conduct, report, publish and appraise the quality of LSRs.

Tailored PRISMA 2020 flow diagrams for living systematic reviews: a methodological survey and a proposal.

: While the PRISMA flow diagram is widely used for reporting standard systematic reviews (SRs), it was not designed for capturing the results of continual searches for studies in living systematic reviews (LSRs). The objectives of this study are (1) to assess how published LSRs report on the flow of studies through the different phases of the review for the different updates; (2) to propose an approach to reporting on that flow. : For objective 1, we identified all LSRs published up to April 2021.

Anticoagulation for the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer.

Background: Compared with people without cancer, people with cancer who receive anticoagulant treatment for venous thromboembolism (VTE) are more likely to develop recurrent VTE.

Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of three types of parenteral anticoagulants (i.e.

Oral anticoagulation in people with cancer who have no therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

Background: Oral anticoagulants may improve the survival of people with cancer through an antithrombotic effect, yet increase the risk of bleeding.

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral anticoagulants in ambulatory people with cancer undergoing chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or radiotherapy (either alone or in combination), with no standard therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.

Search Methods: We conducted comprehensive searches on 14 June 2021, following the original electronic searches performed in February 2016 (last major search).

Antithrombotic therapy for ambulatory patients with multiple myeloma receiving immunomodulatory agents.

Background: Multiple myeloma is a malignant plasma cell disorder characterised by clonal plasma cells that cause end-organ damage such as renal failure, lytic bone lesions, hypercalcaemia and/or anaemia. People with multiple myeloma are treated with immunomodulatory agents including lenalidomide, pomalidomide, and thalidomide. Multiple myeloma is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolism, which appears to be further increased in people receiving immunomodulatory agents.

Using Parallel Streams of Evidence to Inform Guideline Development: The Case of the 2021 American College of Rheumatology Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis Guideline.

Objective: We aim to describe an evidence synthesis approach using parallel streams of evidence that informed the development of the 2021 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guideline for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods: We developed the evidence synthesis approach using parallel streams of evidence in multiple rounds of discussion, piloting, feedback, and revisions. A number of working groups involving ACR staff, content experts, and methodologists coordinated to develop and implement the approach.

Contextual differences considered in the Tunisian ADOLOPMENT of the European guidelines on breast cancer screening.

Background: Breast cancer is a common disease in Tunisia and is associated with high mortality rates. The "Instance Nationale de l'Evaluation et de l'Accréditation en Santé" (INEAS) and the Tunisian Society of Oncology decided to develop practice guidelines on the subject. While the development of de novo guidelines on breast cancer screening is a demanding process, guideline adaptation appears more appropriate and context sensitive.

Weaponised uranium and adverse health outcomes in Iraq: a systematic review.

Background: The US military first deployed depleted uranium (DU) weapons in Iraq during the Gulf War in 1990 and in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Research into the health impacts of DU has been mired in debate and controversy. Research funded by the US government has denied the health risks posed by DU to the Iraqi population, while opponents have claimed that DU is responsible for increased rates of birth defects and cancers in Iraq.

American Society of Hematology 2021 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention and treatment in patients with cancer.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients with cancer. Patients with cancer and VTE are at a markedly increased risk for morbidity and mortality.

Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about the prevention and treatment of VTE in patients with cancer.

Evaluating prophylactic heparin in ambulatory patients with solid tumours: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

Background: Study-level meta-analyses provide high-certainty evidence that heparin reduces the risk of symptomatic venous thromboembolism for patients with cancer; however, whether the benefits and harms associated with heparin differ by cancer type is unclear. This individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials examines the effect of heparin on survival, venous thromboembolism, and bleeding in patients with cancer in general and by type.

Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and The Cochrane Library for randomised controlled trials comparing parenteral anticoagulants with placebo or standard care in ambulatory patients with solid tumours and no indication for anticoagulation published from the inception of each database to January 14, 2017, and updated it on May 14, 2020, without language restrictions.

Potential impact of missing outcome data on treatment effects in systematic reviews: imputation study.

Objective: To assess the risk of bias associated with missing outcome data in systematic reviews.

Design: Imputation study.

Setting: Systematic reviews.

Meta-Analyses Proved Inconsistent in How Missing Data Were Handled Across Their Included Primary Trials: A Methodological Survey.

Background: How systematic review authors address missing data among eligible primary studies remains uncertain.

Objective: To assess whether systematic review authors are consistent in the way they handle missing data, both across trials included in the same meta-analysis, and with their reported methods.

Methods: We first identified 100 eligible systematic reviews that included a statistically significant meta-analysis of a patient-important dichotomous efficacy outcome.

The Khorana score for prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

Background: Oncology guidelines suggest using the Khorana score to select ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy for primary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention, but its performance in different cancers remains uncertain.

Objective: To examine the performance of the Khorana score in assessing 6-month VTE risk, and the efficacy and safety of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) among high-risk Khorana score patients.

Methods: This individual patient data meta-analysis evaluated (ultra)-LMWH in patients with solid cancer using data from seven randomized controlled trials.

Methods of conduct and reporting of living systematic reviews: a protocol for a living methodological survey.

The living systematic review (LSR) is an emerging approach for improved evidence synthesis that uses continual updating to include relevant new evidence as soon as it is published. The objectives of this study are to: 1) assess the methods of conduct and reporting of living systematic reviews using a living study approach; and 2) describe the life cycle of living systematic reviews, i.e.

A guidance was developed to identify participants with missing outcome data in randomized controlled trials.

Background And Objectives: In order for authors of systematic reviews to address missing data in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), they need to first identify the number of trial participants with missing data. The objective of this study was to provide guidance for authors of systematic reviews on how to identify participants with missing outcome data in reports of RCTs.

Methods: Guidance statements were informed by a review of studies addressing the topic of missing data and an iterative process of feedback and refinement, through meetings involving experts in health research methodology and authors of systematic reviews.

Effectiveness of digital technologies at improving vaccine uptake and series completion - A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background: Recent outbreaks and renewed concerns about immunization coverage call for new and effective interventions to improve vaccine uptake. Digital technologies have the potential to help address both suboptimal vaccine uptake and series completion. However, the effectiveness of pushing information and reminders to patients through digital technologies to address vaccination is not known.

Potentially missing data are considerably more frequent than definitely missing data: a methodological survey of 638 randomized controlled trials.

Background And Objective: Missing data for the outcomes of participants in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a key element of risk of bias assessment. However, it is not always clear from RCT reports whether some categories of participants were followed-up or not (i.e.

Anticoagulation for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer.

Background: The choice of the appropriate perioperative thromboprophylaxis for people with cancer depends on the relative benefits and harms of different anticoagulants.

Objectives: To systematically review the evidence for the relative efficacy and safety of anticoagulants for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer.

Search Methods: This update of the systematic review was based on the findings of a comprehensive literature search conducted on 14 June 2018 that included a major electronic search of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2018, Issue 6), MEDLINE (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid); handsearching of conference proceedings; checking of references of included studies; searching for ongoing studies; and using the 'related citation' feature in PubMed.

Anticoagulation for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer.

Background: Cancer increases the risk of thromboembolic events, especially in people receiving anticoagulation treatments.

Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs), direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the long-term treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in people with cancer.

Search Methods: We conducted a literature search including a major electronic search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid); handsearching conference proceedings; checking references of included studies; use of the 'related citation' feature in PubMed and a search for ongoing studies in trial registries.

Anticoagulation for people with cancer and central venous catheters.

Background: Central venous catheter (CVC) placement increases the risk of thrombosis in people with cancer. Thrombosis often necessitates the removal of the CVC, resulting in treatment delays and thrombosis-related morbidity and mortality. This is an update of the Cochrane Review published in 2014.