Korábbi változatok

• includes evaluation of quality of evidence 
• also needs to address processing of real world evidence
• [weave in ICER - search ISER opioids]

• For people creating evidence syntheses
  • See if work on planned topic has been done already - search L*VE/Epistemonikos (2K reviews - cover many questions - only a fraction registered in PROSPERO; most reviews are out of date - only 3% have all the trials they should), PROSPERO for what's in the pipeline. Make sure that any existing reviews look at outcomes that are pertinent to your needs [leverage COMET - outcome measures], etc. that of interest for the need at hand. Very hard for user to identify a review that's up to date. COVID-END repository of Best Evidence Syntheses can be helpful here.
  • Need to have access to raw data that fed into the review so it's more re-usable.
  • important to understand end-user needs so that the review can be aimed at addressing them
  • AHRQ has methods guides, Cochrane has them. Are there tools for this on COVID - e.g., Resources and tools for researchers considering and conducting
    COVID-19 evidence syntheses (From COVID-END Synthesizing WG)
• Study Quality Assessments
  • For randomized trials (including open label), evaluate using the newest version of the RoB2 (15 March 2019) Source = https://www.riskofbias.info/
  • For non-randomized intervention studies including cohort studies, evaluate using the newest version of the ROBINS-I (version 19 September 2016)Source = https://www.riskofbias.info/
  • For case-control studies evaluate using the Newcastle Ottawa scale for case-control studies. (Note that the ROBINS-I has not yet been adapted for use with case-control study designs – but keep watch out for this) Source = http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp
  • For cross-sectional studies evaluate using the NIH/NHLBI tool Source = https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools
  • For case-series studies consider evaluations using the Specialist Unit for Review Evidence (SURE) checklist. It is older and may have been replaced with newer tools. Source =https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/specialist-unit-for-review-evidence/resources/critical-appraisal-checklists
  • For guidelines, evaluate using AGREE II. https://www.agreetrust.org/agree-ii/
  • For systematic reviews, consider using AMSTAR II: https://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j4008 An alternative would be Documentation and Appraisal Review Tool (DART) https://www.wjgnet.com/2308-3840/full/v3/i3/142.htm Or an older tool called Guyatt-Oxman: https://cdnlinks.lww.com/permalink/jbjs/b/jbjs_2017_03_06_dijkman_48_sdc1.pdf

• For organizations consuming evidence syntheses
  • For selecting/using synthesized evidence: Is there a GRADE evidence profile? Do they make quality assessments? How comprehensive are they? Search date

--------------------

Regarding Value Sets recommend the following process (applies to anticoagulation, testing/triage, vaccines, steroids, and any other topic):

1. Take inventory of what value sets you’ll need (be specific)
2. Check Alliance website or Value Set Authority Center (VSAC), we might have already published some of them among the 600+ value sets
3. If certain value sets are not present or you are unsure, contact Victor Lee (Victor_Lee@ClinicalArchitecture.com) to inquire or to request development

Clinical Architecture and other Alliance collaborators are donating our efforts, and Clinical Architecture is leveraging its software tooling, hosting infrastructure, and manual labor to donate all of the COVID-19-related value set content to the public domain (i.e., completely free, no strings attached). That being said, we all have day jobs, so we appreciate having as much lead time as possible to fulfill requests. Happy to take questions.

• See Sources/Repositories from Identify Studies table
• ClinicalTrials.gov/COVID-19; New pubmed interface; DoctorEvidence CORD-19 Dataset Search
• PROSPERO

• Underlying justification and evidence tables (critically ill and acutely ill) from ASH Anticoagulation Living Guidelines
• L*VE/Epistemonikos search on antithrombotics; can send email when new study/review/guideline is published.
• Rapid Cochrane review on anticoagulation in COVID-19 patients
• Systematic review on anticoagulants in COVID-19

• BMJ EBM rapid review on COVID tests

• SRDR+
• COVID NMA Project
• COVID-END Best Evidence Syntheses Inventory ('best evidence syntheses' on clinical management)
  • reviews that are living, up to date, high quality and where there is a GRADE evidence profile. 
• LIVING Project - living systematic review of COVID-19 interventions;
• L*VE/Epistemonikos, 
• VA Evidence Synthesis Program catalog of COVID-19 Evidence Reviews;
• GIN COVID-19 Evidence Resources
• EvidenceAid
• Usher Network for COVID-19 Evidence Reviews

• IOM Report: Finding What Works in Health Care:  Standards for Systematic Reviews
• EBM on FHIR/COKA (standards include: Evidence, EvidenceReport, EvidenceVariable, Group, Citation
• Vocabulary Map for Evidence-related resources[ Project Google Drive])
• AGREE II for rating the quality of guidelines
• [Add AMSTAR and all study quality rating tools here]

• COKA Steroids for COVID-19 Systematic Meta-Review Protocol; slides about this effort

• Resources and tools for researchers considering and conducting
  COVID-19 evidence syntheses (From COVID-END Synthesizing WG)
• GIN COVID-19 Evidence Resources
• SRDR+, Covidence, Distiller SR, RevMan, JBI Sumari
• Doctor Evidence Analytics Tool
• AHRQ EPC Methods Guides
• COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials
• Equator Network: Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research
• STARR Decision Tool (for rapid review approaches)

• COVID-NMA has initiated communication with all trialists to try to ensure consistent approaches e.g. selection of outcomes, reduction of risk of bias, and to invite them to contribute missing data. 
• Framework slides: Applying Standards to the Evidence Domain (from the COKA Evidence Ecosystem Liaison WG)