Graphical Representation of Overlap for <scp>OVErviews</scp>: <scp>GROOVE</scp> tool

Pérez-Bracchiglione, Javier; Meza, Nicolás; Bangdiwala, Shrikhant I; Guzmán, Ena Niño de; Urrútia, Gerard; Bonfill, Xavier; Madrid, Eva

doi:10.1002/jrsm.1557

Cited by 92 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…ccaR is a free, open-source package and it is an alternative to the Groove tool that uses excel. 12 It provides an overall CCA value, a table with all the pairwise CCA calculations, and a highly customizable, publicationready plot. The generated heatmap presents the single/ total number of primary studies included in each review, a continuous color-coded legend, and the (adjusted) CCA values.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The total number of all pairs of k SRs is k (k − 1)/2 . The CCApaired may be used as a measure of overlap of primary studies between pairs of reviews in graphical displays, such as heatmaps 11,12 …”

Section: Software Functionalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11 A tool for graphical representation of overlap for overviews (GROOVE) has been recently developed in an Excel form and facilitates the calculation and presentation of the CCA index. 12 However, the design interface of a spreadsheet may have certain limitations when, for example, more comprehensive visualizations or automated and reproducible processes are required. Therefore, a tool with more flexible characteristics is needed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

ccaR: A package for assessing primary study overlap across systematic reviews in overviews

Βουγιούκας

Diakonidis

Mavromanoli

et al. 2022

Research Synthesis Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An overview of reviews aims to collect, assess, and synthesize evidence from multiple systematic reviews (SRs) on a specific topic using rigorous and reproducible methods. An important methodological challenge in conducting an overview of reviews is the management of overlapping data due to the inclusion of the same primary studies in SRs. We present a free, open‐source R package called ccaR (https://github.com/thdiakon/ccaR) that provides easy‐to‐use functions for assessing the degree of overlap of primary studies in an overview of reviews with the use of the corrected cover area (CCA) index. A worked example with and without consideration of chronological structural missingness is outlined, illustrating the steps involved in, calculating the CCA index and creating a publication‐ready heatmap. We expect ccaR to be useful for overview authors, methodologists, and reviewers who are familiar with the basics of R and contribute to the discussion on different methodological approaches for implementing the CCA index. Future research and applications could further investigate the functionality or potential limitations of our package and other potential uses.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Software Functionalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

ccaR: A package for assessing primary study overlap across systematic reviews in overviews

Βουγιούκας

Diakonidis

Mavromanoli

et al. 2022

Research Synthesis Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 20 Study double-counting in different systematic reviews will be presented visually using the Graphical Representation of Overlap for OVErviews (GROOVE) tool. 21 GROOVE provides a matrix of evidence with the number of included primary studies and systematic reviews, determining the number of overlapped and non-overlapped primary studies. The tool also allows calculation of the overall corrected covered area (CCA) using a formula (with variables from the matrix) that quantifies the overlap degree.…”

Section: Methods and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Preferences about place of end-of-life care and death of patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families: a protocol for an umbrella review

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionFor most of history, the majority of people died at home surrounded by family. However, the global scenario has progressively changed towards hospital death and more recently in some countries back again towards home, with indication that COVID-19 may have further increased the number of home deaths. It is therefore timely to establish the state-of-the-art about people’s preferences for place of end-of-life care and death, to understand the full spectrum of preferences, nuances and commonalities worldwide. This protocol describes the methods for an umbrella review which aims to examine and synthesise the available evidence regarding preferences about place of end-of-life care and death of patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families.Methods and analysisWe will search for relevant systematic reviews (quantitative and/or qualitative) in six databases from inception without language restrictions: PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PROSPERO and Epistemonikos. Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for umbrella reviews, eligibility screening, data extraction and quality assessment (using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist) will be done by two independent reviewers. We will report the screening process using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. Study double-counting will be reported using the Graphical Representation of Overlap for OVErviews tool. A narrative synthesis will include ‘Summary of Evidence’ tables to address five review questions (distribution of preferences and reasons, influencing variables, place of care vs place of death, changes over time, congruence between preferred and actual places), grading the evidence on each question using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and/or GRADE-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research.Ethics and disseminationThis review does not require ethical approval. The results will be presented at conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42022339983.

show abstract

“…The degree of overlap of primary studies included in the reviews (namely, the fraction of evidence synthesised in two or more reviews) was estimated using the Corrected Covered Area methodology 27 and the Graphical Representation of Overlap for OVErviews open-access tool. 28 We built separate citation matrices for quantitative and qualitative primary studies and we accounted for structural missingness based on publication date (ie, primary papers published after the review was completed were not marked as missing from the reviews). Guided by the methodology developed by Pollock et al, 29 two team members went through the pairs with ‘very high’ (≥15%) and ‘high’ (10%–15%) overlap, and decisions on inclusion were made based on relevance, search dates, potential contribution to the umbrella review and quality of the publication (described in online supplemental table 3 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of interventions designed to mitigate the negative health outcomes of informal caregiving to older adults: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThis umbrella review aimed to evaluate whether certain interventions can mitigate the negative health consequences of caregiving, which interventions are more effective than others depending on the circumstances, and how these interventions are experienced by caregivers themselves.DesignAn umbrella review of systematic reviews was conducted.Data sourcesQuantitative (with or without meta-analyses), qualitative and mixed-methods systematic reviews were included.Eligibility criteriaReviews were considered eligible if they met the following criteria: included primary studies targeting informal (ie, unpaid) caregivers of older people or persons presenting with ageing-related diseases; focused on support interventions and assessed their effectiveness (quantitative reviews) or their implementation and/or lived experience of the target population (qualitative reviews); included physical or mental health-related outcomes of informal caregivers.Data extraction and synthesisA total of 47 reviews were included, covering 619 distinct primary studies. Each potentially eligible review underwent critical appraisal and citation overlap assessment. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers and cross-checked. Quantitative review results were synthesised narratively and presented in tabular format, while qualitative findings were compiled using the mega-aggregation framework synthesis method.ResultsThe evidence regarding the effectiveness of interventions on physical and mental health outcomes was inconclusive. Quantitative reviews were highly discordant, whereas qualitative reviews only reported practical, emotional and relational benefits. Multicomponent and person-centred interventions seemed to yield highest effectiveness and acceptability. Heterogeneity among caregivers, care receivers and care contexts was often overlooked. Important issues related to the low quality of evidence and futile overproduction of similar reviews were identified.ConclusionsLack of robust evidence calls for better intervention research and evaluation practices. It may be warranted to avoid one-size-fits-all approaches to intervention design. Primary care and other existing resources should be leveraged to support interventions, possibly with increasing contributions from the non-profit sector.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021252841; BMJ Open: doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053117.

show abstract

Graphical Representation of Overlap for OVErviews: GROOVE tool

Cited by 92 publications

References 27 publications

ccaR: A package for assessing primary study overlap across systematic reviews in overviews

ccaR: A package for assessing primary study overlap across systematic reviews in overviews

Preferences about place of end-of-life care and death of patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families: a protocol for an umbrella review

Effectiveness of interventions designed to mitigate the negative health outcomes of informal caregiving to older adults: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About