Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in regional anesthesia and pain medicine (Part II): guidelines for performing the systematic review

Ryan S. D'Souza, Michael J. Barrington, Ananda Sen, Edward J. Mascha, George A. Kelley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

In Part I of this series, we provide guidance for preparing a systematic review protocol. In this article, we highlight important steps and supplement with exemplars on conducting and reporting the results of a systematic review. We suggest how authors can manage protocol violations, multiplicity of outcomes and analyses, and heterogeneity. The quality (certainty) of the evidence and strength of recommendations should follow the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. It is our goal that Part II of this series provides valid guidance to authors and peer reviewers who conduct systematic reviews to adhere to important constructs of transparency, structure, reproducibility, and accountability. This will likely result in more rigorous systematic reviews being submitted for publication to the journals like Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine and Anesthesia & Analgesia.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number104802
JournalRegional anesthesia and pain medicine
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2023

Keywords

  • Anesthesia, Local
  • EDUCATION
  • TECHNOLOGY

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in regional anesthesia and pain medicine (Part II): guidelines for performing the systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this