AHRQ EPC Series on Improving Translation of Evidence: Web-Based Interactive Presentation of Systematic Review Reports


      Systematic reviews are used by a diverse range of users to address an ever-expanding set of questions and needs. It is unlikely that a single static report will efficiently satisfy the different needs of diverse users.


      An open-source Web-based interactive report presentation of a systematic review was developed to allow users to generate their own “reports” from the information produced by the review. Data from a broad-scope systematic review were used with network meta-analysis conducted on nonsurgical treatments of urinary incontinence (UI) in women. Stakeholders informed and piloted the tool and assessed its usefulness.


      The final tool allows users to obtain descriptive and analytic results for a network of treatment categories and various outcomes (cure, improvement, satisfaction, quality of life, adverse events) across several subgroups (all women, older women, or those with stress or urgency UI), along with study-level information, and overall conclusions. The stakeholders were satisfied with the functionality of the tool and proposed a number of improvements regarding presentation (for example, present information on numbers of trials in figures), analyses (for example, allow on-the-fly subgroup analyses, explore trade-offs between several outcomes), and information sharing (for example, provide ability to import/export data from/to other software).


      A prototype tool to present customized analyses from broad-scope systematic reviews is presented. Further improvements are suggested to develop a scalable tool to make systematic reviews useful to increasingly diverse user groups.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


      1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Nonsurgical Treatments for Urinary Incontinence in Women: A Systematic Review Update. Balk E, et al. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 212. AHRQ Publication No. 18-EHC016-EF. Aug 2018. Accessed May 28, 2019.

        • Barclay C.
        • et al.
        AHRQ Series on Improving Translation of Evidence: Implementing Evidence-Based Screening and Counseling for Unhealthy Alcohol Use with Epic-Based Electronic Health Record Tools.
        . 2019; 45: 566-574
        • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
        • et al.
        Understanding Health-Systems’ Use of and Need for Evidence to Inform Decisionmaking.
        in: Research White Paper. AHRQ Publication No. 17(18)-EHC035-EG. Oct 2017
        • Oregon Health & Science University School of Medicine
        Making Systematic Reviews More Useful to Learning Health Systems: A Pilot Project. September 2018
        • MAGIC Project
        Home page.
        Date accessed: May 28, 2019
        • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
        Welcome to the Systematic Review Data Repository.
        Date accessed: May 28, 2019
        • Wallace B.C.
        • et al.
        Meta-Analyst: software for meta-analysis of binary, continuous and diagnostic data.
        BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009 Dec 4; 9: 80
      2. Greco S. Ehrgott M. Figueira J.R. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. 2nd ed. vols. 1 and 2. Springer, New York2005
        • Agoritsas T.
        • et al.
        Decision aids that really promote shared decision making: the pace quickens.
        BMJ. 2015 Feb 10; 350: g7624
        • Trikalinos T.A.
        • Hoaglin D.C.
        • Schmid C.H.
        An empirical comparison of univariate and multivariate meta-analyses for categorical outcomes.
        Stat Med. 2014 Apr 30; 33: 1441-1459
        • Trikalinos T.A.
        • Olkin I.
        A method for the meta-analysis of mutually exclusive binary outcomes.
        Stat Med. 2008 Sep 20; 27: 4279-4300
        • Trikalinos T.A.
        • Olkin I.
        Meta-analysis of effect sizes reported at multiple time points: a multivariate approach.
        Clin Trials. 2012; 9: 610-620
        • Dias S.
        • et al.
        Evidence synthesis for decision making 1: introduction.
        Med Decis Mak. 2013; 33: 597-606
        • Trikalinos T.A.
        • Russell L.B.
        • Sanders D.G.
        Evidence synthesis for informing cost-effectiveness analysis.
        in: Neumann P.J. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, New York2017: 237-276