First step methodology

From GBD Genitourinary Group Help System

Jump to: navigation, search

First step of references estimation is based only on evaluation of article title and abstract with making the decision whether the reference is potentially useful or not useful for further evaluation.

Contents

The main goals of the first step of epidemiologic review

The main goal of the first step is to identify in bibliographic databases (Medline and EMBASE) all references concerning epidemiology of selected major genitourinary diseases through period 1980-2009 years according predefined search strategy, and to select from them potentially useful for further analysis literature sources. The key feature of the first step evaluation is to perform more sensitive than specific search and literature selection.

Results of the the first step

As the result of work team of scientists in the [Center of Mario Negri Institute] 33,707 references were obtained from Medline and EMBASE which are contain data for epidemiological parameters on conditions of Genitourinary Group responsibility. According to the predefined criteria of usefulness for the future analysis 2,341 were selected as potentially useful.

There was a set of 504 abstracts common for all four estimators. Please find the results of iis analysis below.

Reviewer 1 Reviewer 2 Reviewer 3 Reviewer 4
Sensitivity 93.8 98.2 96.7 94.7
Specificity 36.0 82.6 59.6 77.8

Thus, it was confirmed that predefined strategy effectively excludes not useful references and includes potentially useful references for further evaluation.

Genitourinary Group search strategy

Genitourinary Group search strategy

Criteria of inclusion/eclusion for the first step of systematic review

  • Abstract title should be rejected if it does not consider the incidence, prevalence, mortality, survival, complications (cardiovascular diseases, cancer, infections etc) of the following conditions:
    • Acute and chronic glomerulonephritis (including acute or chronic renal failure, end-stage renal disease as sequelae);
    • Chronic pyelonephritis and tubulointerstitial nephritis (including chronic renal failure, end-stage renal disease as sequelae);
    • Urolithiasis (including acute or chronic renal failure, end-stage renal disease as sequelae);
    • Diabetic nephropathy (but not diabetes itself or any other complications of diabetes);
    • Chronic kidney disease
    • Benign prostatic hypertrophy.
  • Abstract title should be rejected if it considers the following kidney diseases:
    • Polycystic kidney disease and other hereditary nephropathies;
    • Congenital genitourinary disorders;
    • Tumors (malignant or benign) of kidney, ureter or bladder;
    • Hypertensive kidney disease;
    • Kidney involvement in systemic vasculitis (lupus erythematosus, hemolytic-uremic syndrome, etc);
    • Acute urinary tract infections.
  • Abstract title should be rejected if it considers modification by lifestyle or medical intervention of aforementioned conditions (including controlled randomized trials).
  • Abstract title should be rejected if it mentions above topics in patients with very special conditions (such as if abstract includes only patients with non-kidney transplants, recurrent glomerulopathies in kidney transplant patients, nephropathy in talassemia etc).
  • Abstract title should be rejected if it considers only case studies or less than 50 patients.
  • Abstract title should be rejected if it considers experimental or in vitro studies.
  • Abstract title should be rejected if it considers acute renal failure related to the exogenous substances (contrast media, drugs etc), sepsis, pancreonecrosis and other conditions not related to the list of mentioned above conditions.
  • Abstract title should be rejected if it considers only narrow topics in kidney diseases field, such as only anemia, only mineral disorders, etc.
  • Abstract title should be marked as potentially useful if it contains data on the mentioned above topics.
  • Abstract title should be marked as potentially useful if it presents data from registries of kidney disease, chronic renal failure, acute renal failure (not only due to aforementioned causes), diabetes (not only diabetic nephropathies), urological pathology.
  • Abstract title should be marked as potentially useful if the reviewer has any doubts about abstract usefulness.
Personal tools