Grant: Project Grant

Replication is a corner stone of the scientific method yet replication of systematic reviews is too often overlooked, done unnecessarily or done poorly, as identified by Francis Collins, the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Excessive replication - doing the same study repeatedly - is unethical and a cause of 'research waste'. There is a lack of guidance for when or why to replicate systematic reviews. Overarching Aim: The proposed research will use an evidence-driven, transparent process and implement consensus approaches to develop value-added guidance on: a) when to replicate and b) when not to replicate systematic reviews. Objectives: We propose three sequential objectives: 1.To assess the extent of replication of systematic review topics and explore reasons for replication as well as issues such as discordance, agreement and bias. 2.To develop consensus-based recommendations on when to replicate systematic reviews of effectiveness (and when not), taking into account the needs of the various stakeholder groups. 3.To identify strategies for disseminating and implementing these recommendations to key stakeholder groups (e.g. patients, clinicians, journal editors, systematic review authors, systematic review users, systematic review organizations (such as CAMARADES, Campbell, Cochrane, Joanna Briggs Institute), guideline developers, research funding agencies, KT researchers). To achieve these objectives we will: assess evidence about when to replicate systematic reviews, document characteristics of overlapping systematic reviews, survey and interview authors of replicated systematic reviews, consult with global experts on replicability guidelines, prioritize and seek consensus on items for systematic review replication guidance, and develop collaborative knowledge translation plan including practical tools for specific knowledge users.