ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2024
Exploring transparent reporting and data availability in systematic reviews to identify subgroup evidence: imaging for suspected hepatocellular carcinoma in the non-cirrhotic liver.
Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aim to illustrate the role of complete and transparent reporting coupled with access to data sourced from published systematic reviews, especially assisting in the identification of evidence for subgroups within the context of a rare disease. To accomplish this principle, we provide a real-world example encountered during the revision of the Dutch clinical practice guideline for hepatocellular carcinoma. Specifically, we retrieved insights from two Cochrane reviews to identify direct evidence concerning the diagnostic test accuracy of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for detecting hepatocellular carcinomas in suspected patients without liver cirrhosis. Through reusing the Cochrane review authors' efforts already undertaken in their exhaustive literature search and selection, we successfully identified relevant direct evidence for this subgroup of suspected patients without cirrhosis and performed an evidence synthesis within the constraints of limited resources for the guideline revision. This approach holds the potential for replication in other subgroups in the context of rare diseases, contingent on the transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews, as well as the availability and accessibility of their extracted data. Consequently, we underscore the importance of adhering to established reporting guidelines for systematic reviews, while simultaneously advocating for increased availability and accessibility to data. Such practices would not only increase the transparency and reproducibility of systematic reviews but could also increase reusability of their data. In turn, the increased reusability could result in reduced resource utilization in other sectors such as the guideline developing community as we show in our example.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.