Table 6.3.

Concise Guide to best practices for evidence syntheses, version 1.0^a

	Intervention	Diagnostic	Prognostic	Qualitative or mixed methods	Prevalence and Incidence	Etiology and Risk	Measurement Properties	Overviews (umbrella reviews)	Scoping Reviews
Methodological guidance	Cochrane^b, JBI	Cochrane, JBI	Cochrane	Cochrane, JBI	JBI	JBI	JBI	Cochrane, JBI	JBI
Reporting ^c
Protocol	PRISMA-P¹¹⁶	PRISMA-P	PRISMA-P	PRISMA-P	PRISMA-P	PRISMA-P	PRISMA-P	PRISMA-P	PRISMA-P
Systematic review	PRISMA 2020¹¹²	PRISMA-DTA¹²⁰	PRISMA 2020	eMERGe^213,d ENTREQ^214,d	PRISMA 2020	PRISMA 2020	PRISMA 2020	PRIOR²¹⁵	PRISMA-ScR¹²¹
Synthesis without MA	SWiM¹⁸⁰	PRISMA-DTA¹²⁰	SWiM^e	eMERGe^213,d ENTREQ^214,d	SWiM^e	SWiM^e	SWiM^e	PRIOR²¹⁵	PRISMA-ScR¹²¹
RoB assessment of included studies ^f	For RCTs: Cochrane RoB2¹⁵⁷ For NRSI: ROBINS-I¹⁵⁸ Other primary research^g	QUADAS-2²¹⁶	Factor review QUIPS²¹⁷ Model review PROBAST⁶⁵	CASP qualitative checklist²¹⁸ JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist^219,h	JBI Checklist for studies reporting prevalence data²²⁰	For NRSI: ROBINS-I¹⁵⁸ Other primary research^g	COSMIN RoB Checklist⁶⁷	AMSTAR-2⁶ or ROBIS⁴	Not requiredⁱ
Overall level of evidence certainty	GRADE²⁷	GRADE adaptation^j	GRADE adaptation^k	CERQual²²¹ ConQual^222,l	GRADE adaptation^m	Risk factorsⁿ	GRADE adaptation^o	GRADE (for intervention reviews) Risk factorsⁿ	Not applicable

AMSTAR, A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews; CASP, Critical Appraisal Skills Programme; CERQual, Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research; ConQual, Establishing Confidence in the output of Qualitative research synthesis; COSMIN, COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments; DTA, diagnostic test accuracy; eMERGe, meta-ethnography reporting guidance; ENTREQ, enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research; GRADE, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation; MA, meta-analysis; NRSI, non-randomized studies of interventions; P, protocol; PRIOR, Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews; PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; PROBAST, Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool; QUADAS, quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews; QUIPS, Quality In Prognosis Studies; RCT, randomized controlled trial; RoB, risk of bias; ROBINS-I, Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions; ROBIS, Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews; ScR, scoping review; SWiM, systematic review without meta-analysis.

Superscript numbers represent citations provided in the main reference list. Supplemental File 6 (http://links.lww.com/JBJSREV/A983) lists links to available online resources for the methods and tools included in the Concise Guide.

The MECIR manual³⁰ provides Cochrane’s specific standards for both reporting and conduct of intervention systematic reviews and protocols.

Editorial and peer reviewers can evaluate completeness of reporting in submitted manuscripts using these tools. Authors may be required to submit a self-reported checklist for the applicable tools.

The decision flowchart described by Flemming and colleagues²²³ is recommended for guidance on how to choose the best approach to reporting for qualitative reviews.

SWiM was developed for intervention studies reporting quantitative data. However, if there is not a more directly relevant reporting guideline, SWiM may prompt reviewers to consider the important details to report. (Personal Communication via email, Mhairi Campbell, 14 Dec 2022).

JBI recommends their own tools for the critical appraisal of various quantitative primary study designs included in systematic reviews of intervention effectiveness, prevalence and incidence, and etiology and risk as well as for the critical appraisal of systematic reviews included in umbrella reviews. However, except for the JBI checklists for studies reporting prevalence data and qualitative research, the development, validity, and reliability of these tools are not well documented.

Studies that are not RCTs or NRSI require tools developed specifically to evaluate their design features. Examples include single case experimental design^155,156 and case reports and series⁸².

The evaluation of methodological quality of studies included in a synthesis of qualitative research is debatable²²⁴. Authors may select a tool appropriate for the type of qualitative synthesis methodology employed. The CASP Qualitative Checklist²¹⁸ is an example of a published, commonly used tool that focuses on assessment of the methodological strengths and limitations of qualitative studies. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research²¹⁹ is recommended for reviews using a meta-aggregative approach.

ⁱ

Consider including risk of bias assessment of included studies if this information is relevant to the research question; however, scoping reviews do not include an assessment of the overall certainty of a body of evidence.

Guidance available from the GRADE working group^225,226; also recommend consultation with the Cochrane diagnostic methods group.

Guidance available from the GRADE Working Group²²⁷; also recommend consultation with Cochrane prognostic methods group.

Used for syntheses in reviews with a meta-aggregative approach²²⁴.

Chapter 5 in the JBI Manual offers guidance on how to adapt GRADE to prevalence and incidence reviews⁶⁹.

ⁿ

Janiaud and colleagues suggest criteria for evaluating evidence certainty for meta-analyses of non-randomized studies evaluating risk factors.²²⁸

The COSMIN user manual provides details on how to apply GRADE in systematic reviews of measurement properties²²⁹.