Assessment of concordance between related systematic reviews and between related guideline recommendations: protocol for a methodological survey.
Agarwal, A.; Albarqouni, L.; Badran, N.; Brax, N.; Gandhi, P.; Pereira, T.; Roberts, A.; El Zein, O.; Akl, E.
Show abstract
Independent systematic reviewers may arrive at different conclusions when analyzing evidence addressing the same clinical questions. Similarly, independent expert panels may arrive at different recommendations addressing the same clinical topics. When faced with a multiplicity of reviews or guidelines on a given topic, users are likely to benefit from a structured approach to evaluate concordance, and to explain discordant findings and recommendations. This protocol proposes a methodological survey to evaluate the prevalence of concordance between reviews addressing similar clinical questions, and between clinical practice guidelines addressing similar topics; and to identify methodological frameworks for the evaluation of concordance between related reviews and between related guidelines.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.