Utilizing Cochrane Breast Cancer Reviews for Clinical Guidelines Analysis
Explore the role of Cochrane Breast Cancer reviews in guiding treatment decisions and influencing clinical practice guidelines. Assess the uptake of these reviews and compare the most cited/accessed ones with those integrated into guidelines. Learn about the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's rigorous methodology and its impact on breast cancer care.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
The use of Cochrane breast cancer reviews by guideline developers and Cochrane (public) users FACULTY OF MEDICINE ML Willson, D O Connell, A Goodwin, N Wilcken Cochrane Breast Cancer Group, NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre
Setting the scene A scoping exercise Increasing volume of trial data available (Bastian et al, PLoS Medicine 2010) Utility of systematic reviews: - can guide treatment decisions - part of the research evidence component of clinical practice guidelines Aim: - assess Cochrane review usage by clinical guidelines and our readers 2
Cochrane Breast Cancer Group: producers of Cochrane (systematic) Reviews Established in 1996 Search for evidence, evaluate its quality and publish results as Cochrane Reviews Published in an online database and available via The Cochrane Library Reviews known to be methodologically rigorous Over 88 Protocols, Reviews and Titles Sometimes integrated into clinical practice guidelines 3
Cochrane Breast Cancer Group: Review portfolio Topics are decided upon by an international, multidisciplinary Editorial Board 4
Cochrane Breast Cancer Group: metrics Publishers provided a short list of 8 most cited + top 10 most accessed 13 of the 18 most cited/accessed Review topics covered: - Prevention, early detection, familial breast cancer, allied health (ie exercise), psychosocial care, complementary therapy, lymphoedema 5 of the 18 covered treatments - Chemo- and targeted therapy, radiation and surgery 5
Specific aims 1. Assess the uptake of Cochrane breast cancer Reviews in clinical practice guidelines 2. Compare most cited/accessed Reviews to those used in guidelines 6
Methods: guideline selection & basic metrics Selected 7 key clinical guideline developers or consensus panels: 1. Advanced Breast Cancer Consensus (ABC1) 2. American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 3. Cancer Australia (CA) 4. Central European Cooperative Oncology Group (CECOG) 5. European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) 6. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 7. Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN) Published from 2001 to March 2014 For each guideline, recorded: 1. Number and title of Cochrane Review citations 2. Scope of guideline Categorised Cochrane Review usage for each guideline developer Compared Reviews in guidelines to most cited/accessed Reviews 7
Results: no. and scope of guidelines 28 guidelines included, published July 2001 to July 2013 8
Results: Cochrane Review usage over time Cumulative no. of guidelines + Cochrane Reviews in guidelines 10
Results: summary 1. An increase in Cochrane review uptake in guidelines over time - Variation in Cochrane review citations by guideline developers 2. An overlap with Reviews used in guidelines and most cited/accessed Reviews - 10 of 18 most cited/accessed Reviews were used once or more than once 3. Slight disconnect - 8 of 18 most cited/accessed Reviews were not used - i.e. peripheral topics 12
Limits, discussion, future implications A preliminary assessment; small sample (n=28) Room to improve communications with guideline developers about upcoming guideline topics Identified some gaps in our Topics list that will need to be addressed Most cited/read reviews tended to be on peripheral topics (e.g. exercise) Results provide a useful baseline for monitoring the use of our Cochrane reviews 13
Acknowledgements A/Prof Nicholas Wilcken (Joint Co-ordinating Editor) Dr Annabel Goodwin (Joint Co-ordinating Editor) Prof Dianne O Connell (Statistical Editor) Cochrane Breast Cancer Group funders: - National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) - National Breast Cancer Foundation (Australia) Supported by: - NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney 14
