Tag Archives: Systematic review

LIRE Systematic Review Among Articles Most Shared & Discussed Online

Cluster Randomized Trials, Pragmatic clinical trials, , , , ,

A systematic review completed by the NIH Collaboratory’s Lumbar Imaging with Reporting of Epidemiology (LIRE) Demonstration Project is among the top 5% of research articles garnering attention online, according to Altmetrics. The article, “Systematic Literature Review of Imaging Features of Spinal Degeneration in Asymptomatic Populations,” was published in the American Journal of Neuroradiology in 2014.

In the systematic review, the researchers found that imaging findings of spine degeneration are present in high proportions of asymptomatic individuals, and these findings increase with age. Thus, many degenerative features found on spine imaging are likely part of normal aging. Given that advanced imaging is increasingly used in the evaluation of patients with lower back pain, knowing the prevalence of degenerative findings in asymptomatic individuals can help clinicians and patients when interpreting imaging findings.

The LIRE pragmatic trial is testing the insertion of these epidemiologic benchmarks into lumbar spine imaging reports with the goal of reducing subsequent tests and treatments, including MRI and CT, opioid prescriptions, spinal injections, or surgery.

View the full article for free
Learn more about the LIRE trial

Systematic Review on Stakeholder Engagement in Comparative Effectiveness and Patient-Centered Outcomes Research

Comparative Effectiveness Research, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, , , ,

This month’s issue of the Journal of General Internal Medicine features a systematic review of stakeholder engagement in comparative effectiveness research and patient-centered outcomes research. Thomas W. Concannon, PhD, and coauthors identified 70 peer-reviewed articles since 2003 that reported on this topic.

Key results included:

  • Patients were the most commonly engaged group, followed by modest engagement of clinicians, and infrequent engagement of other stakeholders across the healthcare system.
  • Stakeholders were more often engaged in earlier stages of research (evidence prioritization and generation) than in later activities such as evidence interpretation and application.

Overall, reporting of stakeholder activities and the effects of engagement were highly variable in the literature. To address this, the authors developed a 7-item questionnaire for the reporting of stakeholder engagement in research. A suggested plan for future research on stakeholder engagement is also outlined.