Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Systematic Reviews
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Protocol

Gray literature in systematic reviews on population health in the Middle East and North Africa: protocol of an overview of systematic reviews and evidence mapping

Authors: Karima Chaabna, Sohaila Cheema, Amit Abraham, Hekmat Alrouh, Ravinder Mamtani, Javaid I. Sheikh

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Systematic review (SR) guidelines recommend extending literature search to gray literature in order to identify all available data related to the review topic. We aim to conduct an overview of SRs on population health in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), to assess the methodology of these SRs, to produce an evidence map highlighting methodological gaps in SRs regarding gray literature searching, and to aid in developing future SRs by listing gray literature sources related to population health in MENA.

Methods/design

We will conduct an overview of SRs based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. This overview will be reported following PRISMA 2009 guidelines. Using comprehensive search criteria, we will search the PubMed database to identify relevant SRs published since 2008. Our primary outcomes are gray literature sources and study-level quality in the gray literature. We will include MENA countries with Arabic, English, French, and/or Urdu as primary official languages and/or media of instruction in universities. Two reviewers will independently conduct a multilevel screening on Rayyan software. Extraction of relevant data will be done on Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software. The methodological quality of included SRs will be assessed using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool. Any disagreements will be resolved by discussion and consensus.
We will estimate the overall proportion of SRs that used gray literature as one of their data sources. Subgroup analyses will be conducted to identify characteristics of these gray literature sources. Chi-squared and t tests will be used to determine whether the differences between subgroups are statistically significant. Additionally, an evidence gap map will be constructed to highlight characteristics and quality of the gray literature used in SRs on population health in MENA and emphasize existing gaps in gray literature searching. We will also list gray literature sources identified in the included SRs stratified by country and research topic.

Discussion

This overview will comprehensively assess the overall quality of the SRs on population health issues in MENA. Our findings will contribute to the improvement of population health research practices in MENA.

Systematic review registration

The systematic review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 26 October 2018 (registration number CRD42017076736 (Syst Rev 2:4, 2013).
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH. Users' guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. Evidence-based medicine working group. Jama. 1994;272(17):1367–71.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Swingler GH, Volmink J, Ioannidis JP. Number of published systematic reviews and global burden of disease: database analysis. Bmj. 2003;327(7423):1083–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Mulrow CD, Cook DJ, Davidoff F. Systematic reviews: critical links in the great chain of evidence. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(5):389–91.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. Available from www.​handbook.​cochrane.​org. Accessed 24 June 2018.
5.
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–34.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Standards for Systematic Reviews of Comparative Effectiveness Research: Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011.
7.
Mahood Q, Van Eerd D, Irvin E. Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: challenges and benefits. Res Synth Methods. 2014;5(3):221–34.CrossRefPubMed
8.
9.
Adams J, Hillier-Brown FC, Moore HJ, Lake AA, Araujo-Soares V, White M, Summerbell C. Searching and synthesising ‘grey literature’ and ‘grey information’ in public health: critical reflections on three case studies. Systematic reviews. 2016;5(1):164.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Hartling L, Featherstone R, Nuspl M, Shave K, Dryden DM, Vandermeer B. Grey literature in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of the contribution of non-English reports, unpublished studies and dissertations to the results of meta-analyses in child-relevant reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17(1):64.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Booth A, Clarke M, Dooley G, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L. PROSPERO at one year: an evaluation of its utility. Systematic reviews. 2013;2:4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA, Group P-P. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic reviews. 2015;4:1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA, Group P-P. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. Bmj. 2015;349:g7647.CrossRef
14.
Richardson WS, Wilson MC, Nishikawa J, Hayward RS. The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions. ACP J Club. 1995;123(3):A12–3.PubMed
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Amara MH. Recent foreign language education policies in Palestine. Language Problems and Language Planning. 2003;27(3):217–32.CrossRef
21.
Baharustani R. Comprehensive study of higher education in Afghanistan. Kabul: Afghanistan Investment Support Agency, Research and Planning Department; 2012.
22.
Belhiah H, Elhami M. English as a medium of instruction in the Gulf: when students and teachers speak. Lang Policy. 2015;14:3.CrossRef
23.
24.
Nadia R. Teaching English in Algeria and educational reforms: an overview on the factors entailing students failure in learning foreign languages at university. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sci. 2011;29:1327–33.CrossRef
25.
Tamtam A, Gallagher F, Naher S, Olabi A. The impact of language of instruction on quality of science and engineering education in Libya: qualitative study of faculty members. European Scientific J. 2013;9(31):19–36.
26.
27.
EP-Nuffic. Education system Morocco. In: 2nd edition edn: EP-Nuffic; 2015.
28.
EP-Nuffic. Education system Syria. In: 1st edition edn: EP Nuffic; 2015.
29.
EP-Nuffic. Education system Iraq. In: 2nd edition edn: EP-Nuffic; 2015.
30.
EP-Nuffic. Education system Egypt. In: 2nd edition edn: EP-Nuffic; 2015.
31.
EP-Nuffic. Education system Lebanon. In: 2nd edition edn: EP-Nuffic; 2016.
32.
33.
Cd L’E. Language education policy profile: Cyprus. In: Conseil de L’Europe; N.D.
34.
UNESCO International Bureau of Education. Bahrain. In: World Data on Education. 6th edition edn: UNESCO International Bureau of Education; 2006.
35.
UNESCO International Bureau of Education. Oman. In: World Data on Education. UNESCO International Bureau of Education; 2011.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
Elmagarmid A, Fedorowicz Z, Hammady H, Ilyas I, Khabsa M, Ouzzani M. Rayyan: a systematic reviews web app for exploring and filtering searches for eligible studies for Cochrane Reviews. In: Evidence-Informed Public Health: Opportunities and Challenges Abstracts of the 22nd Cochrane Colloquium: 2014. Hyderabad: Wiley; 2014.
54.
Chaabna K, Kouyoumjian SP, Abu-Raddad LJ. Hepatitis C virus epidemiology in Djibouti, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0149966.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
55.
Chaabna K, Mohamoud YA, Chemaitelly H, Mumtaz GR, Abu-Raddad LJ. Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of hepatitis C virus (HCV) prevalence and incidence in the Horn of Africa sub-region of the Middle East and North Africa. Systematic reviews. 2014;3:146.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
56.
Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, Porter AC, Tugwell P, Moher D, Bouter LM. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
57.
58.
Pieper D, Buechter RB, Li L, Prediger B, Eikermann M. Systematic review found AMSTAR, but not R(evised)-AMSTAR, to have good measurement properties. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(5):574–83.CrossRefPubMed
59.
60.
Pearson K. On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from random sampling. Philosophical Magazine Series. 1900;5(50):157–75.CrossRef
61.
Miake-Lye IM, Hempel S, Shanman R, Shekelle PG. What is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and products. Systematic reviews. 2016;5:28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
62.
Bougioukas KI, Liakos A, Tsapas A, Ntzani E, Haidich AB. Preferred reporting items for overviews of systematic reviews including harms checklist: a pilot tool to be used for balanced reporting of benefits and harms. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;93:9–24.CrossRefPubMed
63.
Beller EM, Glasziou PP, Altman DG, Hopewell S, Bastian H, Chalmers I, Gotzsche PC, Lasserson T, Tovey D. Group PfA: PRISMA for Abstracts: reporting systematic reviews in journal and conference abstracts. PLoS Med. 2013;10(4):e1001419.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
64.
GL’99 Conference Program. Fourth International Conference on Grey Literature: New Frontiers in Grey Literature. In: 1999. Washington D.C. USA; 1999.
Metadata
Title
Gray literature in systematic reviews on population health in the Middle East and North Africa: protocol of an overview of systematic reviews and evidence mapping
Authors
Karima Chaabna
Sohaila Cheema
Amit Abraham
Hekmat Alrouh
Ravinder Mamtani
Javaid I. Sheikh
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0751-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Systematic Reviews 1/2018 Go to the issue

Systematic review update

Prevention of cervical cancer in HIV-seropositive women from developing countries through cervical cancer screening: a systematic review

Research

Rapid methods including network meta-analysis to produce evidence in clinical decision support: a decision analysis

Protocol

Epidemiology of heart failure in pediatric populations in low- and middle-income countries: a protocol for a systematic review

Protocol

HIV-related data among key populations to inform evidence-based responses: protocol of a systematic review

Protocol

The impact of musculoskeletal injuries sustained in road traffic crashes on work-related outcomes: a protocol for a systematic review

Research

What is the impact on health and wellbeing of interventions that foster respect and social inclusion in community-residing older adults? A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies