4.0 Nuts and Bolts of Systematic Reviews and the Campbell Collaboration Review Process

1
4.0 Nuts and Bolts of Systematic Reviews and
the Campbell Collaboration Review Process

2
Eight Steps in C2 Review

• Formulate review questions
• Define inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Locate studies
• Select studies
• Assess study quality
• Extract data
• Analyze and present results
• Interpret results

3
Uniformity in Protocols

• Adaptation from Cochrane
• Cover sheet
• Background
• Objectives for the Review
• Methods
• Inclusion and exclusion criteria for studies
• Search strategy for studies
• Criteria for determination of independence of
  findings
• Study coding categories
• Statistical procedures and conventions
• Treatment of qualitative research

4
Uniformity in Reviews

• Adaptation from Cochrane
• Cover sheet
• Background
• Objectives for the Review
• Methods
• Time frame
• Updating plans
• Acknowledgements
• Conflict of interest statement
• References
• Tables

5

• Name and affiliation of primary reviewer
• Name(s) and affiliation(s) of co-reviewer(s)
• Provisional title
• Objective
• 5) Rationale for review / background

6

• Method
• Types of studies included
• Types of participants included
• Types of interventions
• Types of outcomes
• Quality appraisal procedures
• Methods for data extraction
• Quality assurance procedures

 w1Is this what you had in mind?  w2Is it
types of outcome measures (e.g., standardized
tests) or measures (e.g., sound blending, math
computations,e tc)??  w3If this is analogous to
the Cochrane A-B-C rating we probably need to
give an e.g.this has not been a well discussed
process in C2.
7

• 7) Roles/responsibilities/expertise of review
  team
• Content
• Systematic review methods
• Information retrieval
• Statistical analysis (meta-analysis)

 w1Is this what you had in mind?  w2Is it
types of outcome measures (e.g., standardized
tests) or measures (e.g., sound blending, math
computations,e tc)??  w3If this is analogous to
the Cochrane A-B-C rating we probably need to
give an e.g.this has not been a well discussed
process in C2.
8

• Support required (any support/guidance required)
• 9) Contact details of primary reviewer
• Name
• Title
• Affiliation
• Address 1
• Address 2
• City
• State, Province or County

 w1Is this what you had in mind?  w2Is it
types of outcome measures (e.g., standardized
tests) or measures (e.g., sound blending, math
computations,e tc)??  w3If this is analogous to
the Cochrane A-B-C rating we probably need to
give an e.g.this has not been a well discussed
process in C2.
9

• Approximate date for submission of DRAFT PROTOCOL
  (please note this should be no longer than 6
  months after title approval)
• 11) Approximate date for submission of DRAFT
  REVIEW (please note this should be no longer than
  one year after title approval)

 w1Is this what you had in mind?  w2Is it
types of outcome measures (e.g., standardized
tests) or measures (e.g., sound blending, math
computations,e tc)??  w3If this is analogous to
the Cochrane A-B-C rating we probably need to
give an e.g.this has not been a well discussed
process in C2.
10
An Example of a C2 Review
Herb Turner, Chad Nye, and Jamie Schwartz
March 31, 2006
11
The Forest Plot

12
116
116
48
48
23
23
13

• How To Get Started
• on a C2 Review

14
Considerations in Getting Started

• Topics
• Hot Topics
• Interest Topics
• Policy Topics
• Study Accessibility
• Available Resources
• Students
• Costs
• Time
• Collaboration