Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGonot-Schoupinsky, Freda
dc.contributor.authorGarip, Gulcan
dc.contributor.authorSheffield, David
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-24T09:45:32Z
dc.date.available2021-11-24T09:45:32Z
dc.date.issued2021-11-17
dc.identifier.citationGonot-Schoupinsky, F.N., Garip, G. and Sheffield, D., (2021). 'Facilitating the planning and evaluation of narrative intervention reviews: Systematic Transparency Assessment in Intervention Reviews (STAIR)'. Evaluation and Program Planning, pp, 1-35.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.102043
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10545/626135
dc.description.abstractNarrative reviews offer a flexible way to report intervention results and comprise the majority of reviews published in top medical journals. However variations in their transparency pose evaluation challenges, compromising their value and potentially resulting in research wastage. Calls have been made to reduce the number of narrative reviews published. Others argue narrative reviews provide an important platform and should even be placed on an equal footing to systematic reviews. We believe narrative intervention reviews can provide a vital perspective when transparent, and thus support Systematic Transparency Assessment in Intervention Reviews (STAIR). This research evaluates the transparency of 172 health-related narrative and literature reviews (K = 172), by assessing how they communicate information about the interventions they review. Eight points supporting transparency, relating to sample sizes, traceability, article numbers, and references, were assessed. Half of the reviews reported on at least four of the eight points, but 24% reported on none. Only 56% of the reviews clearly communicated full references. The STAIR* (Sample sizes, Traceability, Article numbers, Intervention numbers, References*) checklist comprises five sections, and nine points. It is proposed as a convenient tool to address STAIR and complement existing review guidelines to assist authors in planning, reviewers in evaluating, and scholars in utilising narrative reviews. The objectives of STAIR* are to: 1) encourage narrative review transparency and readability, 2) facilitate the incorporation of narrative reviews results into other research; and 3) enrich narrative review methodology with a checklist to guide, and evaluate, intervention reviews.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipN/Aen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718921001464en_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectnarrative reviewen_US
dc.subjectinterventionsen_US
dc.subjectChecklisten_US
dc.subjecthealth related researchen_US
dc.titleFacilitating the planning and evaluation of narrative intervention reviews: Systematic Transparency in All Intervention Reviews (STAIR)en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.eissn0149-7189
dc.contributor.departmentIndependent Researcheren_US
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Derbyen_US
dc.identifier.journalEvaluation and Program Planningen_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-11-10
dc.author.detail784730en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Publisher version
Thumbnail
Name:
3EPP Submission Finalx - October ...
Embargo:
2023-11-17
Size:
648.5Kb
Format:
Microsoft Word
Description:
Author accepted manuscript

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International