Citation classics in systematic reviews and meta-analyses : who wrote the top 100 most cited articles?

Background: Systematic reviews of the literature occupy the highest position in currently proposed hierarchies of evidence. The aims of this study were to assess whether citation classics exist in published systematic review and meta-analysis (SRM), examine the characteristics of the most frequently cited SRM articles, and evaluate the contribution of different world regions. Methods: The 100 most cited SRM were identified in October 2012 using the Science Citation Index database of the Institute for Scientific Information. Data were extracted by one author. Spearman’s correlation was used to assess the association between years since publication, numbers of authors, article length, journal impact factor, and average citations per year. Results: Among the 100 citation classics, published between 1977 and 2008, the most cited article received 7308 citations and the least-cited 675 citations. The average citations per year ranged from 27.8 to 401.6. First authors from the USA produced the highest number of citation classics (n=46), followed by the UK (n=28) and Canada (n=15). The 100 articles were published in 42 journals led by the Journal of the American Medical Association (n=18), followed by the British Medical Journal (n=14) and The Lancet (n=13). There was a statistically significant positive correlation between number of authors (Spearman’s rho=0.320, p=0.001), journal impact factor (rho=0.240, p=0.016) and average citations per year. There was a statistically significant negative correlation between average citations per year and year since publication (rho = -0.636, p=0.0001). The most cited papers identified seminal contributions and originators of landmark methodological aspects of SRM and reflect major advances in the management of and predisposing factors for chronic diseases. Conclusions: Since the late 1970s, the USA, UK, and Canada have taken leadership in the production of citation classic papers. No first author from low or middle-income countries (LMIC) led one of the most cited 100 SRM

Building evidence for improving childhood immunisation coverage in Africa.

Includes abstract.Includes bibliographical references.The Expanded Programme on Immunisation has the potential to substantially reduce child mortality and contribute to achieving the Millennium Development Goals. We assessed the programme’s performance in Africa, the reasons for poor performance, and effective interventions for improving its performance on the continent. We used a combination of methods including systematic reviews, bibliometric analyses, generalised linear models, and grading of the quality of evidence. We found that African countries have made extraordinary advances since childhood immunisation programmes began in 1974. However, there exist wide inter-country and intra-country differences, and the quality of immunisation data is poor. Besides, vaccines are administered well after the recommended ages in many countries; leaving children exposed to deadly vaccine-preventable diseases for long periods. In addition, Africa’s contribution to the global immunisation research output is minimal. There is no association between research productivity and immunisation coverage in Africa, which may signal lack of interactive communication between policymakers and researchers. Furthermore, individual and contextual factors (defined at community and country levels) are independently associated with low immunisation coverage; suggesting that immunisation system strengthening should address people and the communities and societies in which they live. Lastly, we found moderate-to-high quality evidence that interactive educational meetings, audit and feedback, supportive supervision; and use of community health workers, parent reminders, home visits, interactive communication, mass media, and material incentives have the potential to improve childhood immunisation coverage in Africa

Three pillars to strengthening health systems in African countries

There is no better time for Africa to implement a new public health order with strengthened national public health institutions. Vaccine manufacturing and sustainable investments can help to reorganise the continent’s health systems to address COVID-19 as well as long-term health issues

Systematic reviews in context: highlighting systematic reviews relevant to Africa in the Pan African Medical Journal

Health research serves to answer questions concerning health and to accumulate facts (evidence) required to guide healthcare policy and practice. However, research designs vary and different types of healthcare questions are best answered by different study designs. For example, qualitative studies are best suited for answering questions about experiences and meaning; cross-sectional studies for questions concerning prevalence; cohort studies for questions regarding incidence and prognosis; and randomised controlled trials for questions on prevention and treatment. In each case, one study would rarely yield sufficient evidence on which to reliably base a healthcare decision. An unbiased and transparent summary of all existing studies on a given question (i.e. a systematic review) tells a better story than any one of the included studies taken separately. A systematic review enables producers and users of research to gauge what a new study has contributed to knowledge by setting the study’s findings in the context of all previous studies investigating the same question. It is therefore inappropriate to initiate a new study without first conducting a systematic review to find out what can be learnt from existing studies. There is nothing new in taking account of earlier studies in either the design or interpretation of new studies. For example, in the 18th century James Lind conducted a clinical trial followed by a systematic review of contemporary treatments for scurvy; which showed fruits to be an effective treatment for the disease. However, surveys of the peerreviewed literature continue to provide empirical evidence that systematic reviews are seldom used in the design and interpretation of the findings of new studies. Such indifference to systematic reviews as a research function is unethical, unscientific, and uneconomical. Without systematic reviews, limited resources are very likely to be squandered on ill-conceived research and policies. In order to contribute in enhancing the value of research in Africa, the Pan African Medical Journal will start a new regular column that will highlight priority systematic reviews relevant to the continent.Pan African Medical Journal 2016; 2

The impact of mass media interventions on tuberculosis awareness, health-seeking behaviour and health service utilisation : a systematic review protocol

Introduction: Tuberculosis (TB) is a serious public health problem in many parts of the world. Strategies to curb the spread of TB must match the multifaceted nature of the epidemic. The use of mass media is one of the important strategies in communicating behavioural change in relation to TB prevention and the treatment. However, the benefits of this intervention are unclear. We, therefore, plan to conduct a systematic review on the effects of mass media interventions on TB awareness, health-seeking behaviour and health service utilisation. Methods and analysis: We will preferably include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this systematic review. However, non-randomised studies will be included if there is an inadequate number of RCTs. We will perform electronic searches in PubMed, Scopus and other databases, along with manual searches. Articles written (or translated) in English and French and published between 1 January 1980 and 31 October 2013 will be eligible for inclusion in this review. The primary outcomes will be TB knowledge, attitudes and awareness, healthcare-seeking behaviour and service utilisation. The secondary outcomes will include stigma and discrimination against people with TB and the costs of the interventions. We will investigate clinical and statistical heterogeneity and pool studies judged to be clinically and statistically homogeneous. Relative risks will be calculated for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, both with their corresponding 95% CIs. Ethics and dissemination: The systematic review will use data that is not linked to individuals. The review findings may have implications for clinical practice and future research, and will be disseminated electronically and in print through peer-reviewed publications

Randomised trials of COVID-19 vaccines in Africa – charting the path forward.

Vaccines have played a critical role in controlling disease outbreaks, hence the proliferation of the development and testing of multiple vaccine candidates during the COVID-19 pandemic. Randomised trials are gold standards for evaluating the safety and efficacy of pharmaceutical interventions such as COVID-19 vaccines. However, contextual differences may attenuate effects of COVID-19 vaccines. Thus, the need to conduct COVID-19 vaccine trials in all settings, including in Africa. We conducted a crosssectional analysis of planned, ongoing, and completed COVID-19 vaccine trials in Africa. We searched the South African National Clinical Trials Register, Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 12 January and 30 April 2022; and complemented this with a search of ClinicalTrials.gov on 17 May 2022. We screened the search output and included randomised trials with at least one recruitment site in Africa. We identified only 108 eligible trials: 90 (83%) evaluating candidate COVID-19 vaccines, 11 (10%) assessing if existing vaccines could prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection, and 7 (7%) evaluating interventions for improving COVID-19 vaccination coverage. South Africa had the highest number of trials at 58 (54%). Beyond South Africa, countries with more than 10 trial sites include Kenya, Ghana, Egypt, Uganda, and Zimbabwe. Among the trials, 14 (13%) do not have principal investigators based in Africa, 39 (30%) are funded by industry, and 91 (84%) are funded by institutions based outside the host country. COVID-19 vaccine trials with recruitment sites in Africa represented only 7% of the 1453 COVID-19 vaccine trials in the ICTRP. The paucity of COVID-19 vaccine trials conducted on the African continent is a cause for concern. This has implications for the role that Africa may play in future pandemics.Significance:• There are generally very few vaccine trials conducted in Africa, relative to the rest of the world.• The limited vaccine trials in Africa could be attributed to limited expertise and resources, both human and material, as well as lack of perceived market.• It is reassuring that many COVID-19 vaccines are planned, being conducted, or have been conducted in multiple African countries; but there is a need for more African public sector funding for vaccine trials on the continent

The Cochrane Corner in the SAMJ: Summaries of Cochrane systematic reviews for evidence-informed practice

This editorial introduces a regular contribution from Cochrane South Africa (http://www.mrc.ac.za/cochrane/cochrane.htm) to the South African Medical Journal, which will be called the ‘Cochrane Corner’. Our contribution takes the form of technical summaries of Cochrane systematic reviews handpicked for their relevance to South Africa and the African region. Our goal is to help ensure that the high-quality evidence in Cochrane reviews reaches a wider audience.

Mobile phone text messaging for promoting adherence to anti-tuberculosis treatment: a systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND: In 2010, there were approximately 8.8 million incident cases of tuberculosis (TB) worldwide. The treatment of TB is at least six months long and may be complicated by a high pill burden. In addition, TB patients often do not take their medication on schedule simply because they forget. Mobile phone text messaging has the potential to help promote TB treatment adherence. We, therefore, propose to conduct a review of current best evidence for the use of mobile phone text messaging to promote patient adherence to TB treatment. METHODS: This is a systematic review of the literature. We will preferably include randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, non-randomized studies (NRS) will be considered if there is an inadequate number of RCTs.We will search PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Science Citation Index, Africa-Wide Information, and WHOLIS electronic databases for eligible studies available by 30 November 2012 regardless of language or publication status. We will also check reference lists for additional studies, identify abstracts from conference proceedings and communicate with authors for any relevant material.At least two authors will independently screen search outputs, select studies, extract data and assess the risk of bias (using separate criteria for RCTs and NRS); resolving discrepancies by discussion and consensus. We will assess clinical heterogeneity by examining the types of participants, interventions and outcomes in each study and pool studies judged to be clinically homogenous. We will also assess statistical heterogeneity using the chi-square test of homogeneity and quantify it using the I-square statistic. If study results are found to be statistically homogeneous (that is heterogeneity P > 0.1), we will pool them using the fixed-effect meta-analysis. Otherwise, we will use random-effects meta-analysis. We will calculate risk ratios and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences for continuous outcomes. For other outcomes without quantitative data, a descriptive analysis will be used.DISCUSSION:Our results can be used by researchers and policy-makers to help inform them of the efficacy of mobile phone text messaging interventions to promote patient adherence to TB treatment