Evaluation of AMSTAR to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews in overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions

Abstract Background Overviews of reviews (overviews) compile information from multiple systematic reviews (SRs) to provide a single synthesis of relevant evidence for decision-making. It is recommended that authors assess and report the methodological quality of SRs in overviews—for example, using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Currently, there is variation in whether and how overview authors assess and report SR quality, and limited guidance is available. Our objectives were to: examine methodological considerations involved in using AMSTAR to assess the quality of Cochrane and non-Cochrane SRs in overviews of healthcare interventions; identify challenges (and develop potential decision rules) when using AMSTAR in overviews; and examine the potential impact of considering methodological quality when making inclusion decisions in overviews. Methods We selected seven overviews of healthcare interventions and included all SRs meeting each overview’s inclusion criteria. For each SR, two reviewers independently conducted AMSTAR assessments with consensus and discussed challenges encountered. We also examined the correlation between AMSTAR assessments and SR results/conclusions. Results Ninety-five SRs were included (30 Cochrane, 65 non-Cochrane). Mean AMSTAR assessments (9.6/11 vs. 5.5/11; p < 0.001) and inter-rater reliability (AC1 statistic: 0.84 vs. 0.69; “almost perfect” vs. “substantial” using the Landis & Koch criteria) were higher for Cochrane compared to non-Cochrane SRs. Four challenges were identified when applying AMSTAR in overviews: the scope of the SRs and overviews often differed; SRs examining similar topics sometimes made different methodological decisions; reporting of non-Cochrane SRs was sometimes poor; and some non-Cochrane SRs included other SRs as well as primary studies. Decision rules were developed to address each challenge. We found no evidence that AMSTAR assessments were correlated with SR results/conclusions. Conclusions Results indicate that the AMSTAR tool can be used successfully in overviews that include Cochrane and non-Cochrane SRs, though decision rules may be useful to circumvent common challenges. Findings support existing recommendations that quality assessments of SRs in overviews be conducted independently, in duplicate, with a process for consensus. Results also suggest that using methodological quality to guide inclusion decisions (e.g., to exclude poorly conducted and reported SRs) may not introduce bias into the overview process

The Role of Data in an Emerging Research Community:

Open science data benefit society by facilitating convergence across domains that are examining the same scientific problem. While cross-disciplinary data sharing and reuse is essential to the research done by convergent communities, so far little is known about the role data play in how these communities interact. An understanding of the role of data in these collaborations can help us identify and meet the needs of emerging research communities which may predict the next challenges faced by science. This paper represents an exploratory study of one emerging community, the environmental health community, examining how environmental health research groups form, collaborate, and share data. Five key insights about the role of data in emerging research communities are identified and suggestions are made for further research

First gen, PhD: Understanding the information horizons of first-generation graduate students pursuing research-intensive careers

How do first-generation college students make the transition to graduate school, and subsequently, research-intensive professions? What information sources are sought and what barriers are experienced by this diverse population as they enter the global community of scholars? Information science researchers have recognized the responsibility to understand and provide support for the information needs of first-generation college students; however, much of the LIS research to date has been conducted at the undergraduate level (see Ilet, 2019). Less is known about the information needs and practices of those first-generation students who decide to pursue graduate education, and subsequently, research-intensive careers. This poster presents a method for studying first-generation graduate students’ information needs in early career decision making, drawing from the information horizons framework developed by Sonnenwald (1999) to examine when first-generation graduate students make significant education and career-related decisions, sources used when seeking career-related information, the role of individuals and information and communication technologies (ICTs) in this information seeking, and the impact of personal and professional values on graduates’ decisions in pursuing research-intensive professions and early professional positions. Ilett, D. (2019). A Critical Review of LIS Literature on First-Generation Students. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 19(1), 177-196. Sonnenwald, D. H. (1999). Evolving perspectives of human information behavior: Contexts, situations, social networks and information horizons. In Exploring the contexts of information behavior: Proceedings of the Second International Conference in Information Needs (pp. 176-190). London: Taylor Graham

Senior Recital

List of performers and performances

Burden of hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis on quality of life

INTRODUCTION: Hereditary transthyretin (hATTR) amyloidosis is a progressive, degenerative disease, with peripheral neuropathy, cardiomyopathy, and other clinical manifestations. In this study we examine the impact of hATTR amyloidosis on quality of life (QOL). METHODS: Neuropathy-specific QOL, measured with the Norfolk QOL-Diabetic Neuropathy questionnaire, was compared between patients with hATTR amyloidosis and patients with type 2 diabetes, whereas generic QOL, measured with the 36-item Short Form Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), was compared between patients with hATTR amyloidosis, the general population, and patients with chronic diseases. RESULTS: Neuropathy-specific QOL for patients with hATTR amyloidosis was nearly equivalent to that of patients with type 2 diabetes with diabetic neuropathy accompanied by a history of ulceration, gangrene, or amputation. Generic QOL was worse than that seen in the general population, with physical functioning worse than that for patients with multiple sclerosis and congestive heart failure. DISCUSSION: Patients with hATTR amyloidosis show significant burden on QOL, particularly in physical functioning. Muscle Nerve 60: 169-175, 201

Protocol for the development of a reporting guideline for umbrella reviews on epidemiological associations using cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies: the Preferred Reporting Items for Umbrella Reviews of Cross-sectional, Case-control and Cohort studies (PRIUR-CCC).

INTRODUCTION Observational studies are fraught with several biases including reverse causation and residual confounding. Overview of reviews of observational studies (ie, umbrella reviews) synthesise systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses of cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies, and may also aid in the grading of the credibility of reported associations. The number of published umbrella reviews has been increasing. Recently, a reporting guideline for overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions (Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR)) was published, but the field lacks reporting guidelines for umbrella reviews of observational studies. Our aim is to develop a reporting guideline for umbrella reviews on cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies assessing epidemiological associations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS We will adhere to established guidance and prepare a PRIOR extension for systematic reviews of cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies testing epidemiological associations between an exposure and an outcome, namely Preferred Reporting Items for Umbrella Reviews of Cross-sectional, Case-control and Cohort studies (PRIUR-CCC). Step 1 will be the project launch to identify stakeholders. Step 2 will be a literature review of available guidance to conduct umbrella reviews. Step 3 will be an online Delphi study sampling 100 participants among authors and editors of umbrella reviews. Step 4 will encompass the finalisation of PRIUR-CCC statement, including a checklist, a flow diagram, explanation and elaboration document. Deliverables will be (i) identifying stakeholders to involve according to relevant expertise and end-user groups, with an equity, diversity and inclusion lens; (ii) completing a narrative review of methodological guidance on how to conduct umbrella reviews, a narrative review of methodology and reporting in published umbrella reviews and preparing an initial PRIUR-CCC checklist for Delphi study round 1; (iii) preparing a PRIUR-CCC checklist with guidance after Delphi study; (iv) publishing and disseminating PRIUR-CCC statement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION PRIUR-CCC has been approved by The Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board and has obtained consent (20220639-01H). Participants to step 3 will give informed consent. PRIUR-CCC steps will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will guide reporting of umbrella reviews on epidemiological associations

The Impact of Unrelated Future Medical Costs on Economic Evaluation Outcomes for Different Models of Diabetes

Objective: This study leveraged data from 11 independent international diabetes models to evaluate the impact of unrelated future medical costs on the outcomes of health economic evaluations in diabetes mellitus. Methods: Eleven models simulated the progression of diabetes and occurrence of its complications in hypothetical cohorts of individuals with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 (T2D) diabetes over the remaining lifetime of the patients to evaluate the cost effectiveness of three hypothetical glucose improvement interventions versus a hypothetical control intervention. All models used the same set of costs associated with diabetes complications and interventions, using a United Kingdom healthcare system perspective. Standard utility/disutility values associated with diabetes-related complications were used. Unrelated future medical costs were assumed equal for all interventions and control arms. The statistical significance of changes on the total lifetime costs, incremental costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) before and after adding the unrelated future medical costs were analysed using t-test and summarized in incremental cost-effectiveness diagrams by type of diabetes. Results: The inclusion of unrelated costs increased mean total lifetime costs substantially. However, there were no significant differences between the mean incremental costs and ICERs before and after adding unrelated future medical costs. Unrelated future medical cost inclusion did not alter the original conclusions of the diabetes modelling evaluations. Conclusions: For diabetes, with many costly noncommunicable diseases already explicitly modelled as complications, and with many interventions having predominantly an effect on the improvement of quality of life, unrelated future medical costs have a small impact on the outcomes of health economic evaluations.</p