LitReviewPackage StepbyStep

Please note that the pages on this website do not reflect the methods and definitions that were used to generate the final set of results for the GBD-2010 study, which was published in December 2012.

-- If you are interested in the methods or results of GBD-2010 and subsequent revisions, please visit the official website of IHME's GBD project (http://www.healthdata.org/gbd). The materials described on the website are now obsolete but these webpages have been retained as an internet archive of the work of the group.

-- Please visit the website www.globalburdenofinjuries.org to find out more about other closely related collaborations of our group members.

This document gives an extensive guide to the process of literature reviewing from the point of the Injury Group in the Global Burden of Disease project with criteria for initial searches and short listing

Steps Involved with the Literature Review Process

Drafted by Claire Bryan-Hancock 18^th May 2009

This document outlines the steps that are taken within a Literature Review in the Global Burden of Disease Project with an emphasis on the Injury Group. Obstacles have also been identified and if researchers have any problems throughout this process they are encouraged to seek solutions from other members of the Injury Expert Group who may have encountered these issues previously, or to highlight solutions for those who may face these obstacles in the future. This can be done on the Injury Group Website at: http://sites.google.com/site/gbdinjuryexpertgroup/Home or by contacting Claire at claire.bryanhancock@flinders.edu.au or James at james.harrison@flinders.edu.au. A systematic Literature Review outline can be found within chapter 19 of the Global Burden of Disease Operations Manual (pg. 121).

Step 1 – Identify the Topic

In this stage it is important to determine whether other members of the GBD Injury Group are undertaking the topic which you are wishing to research. If this is the case let the members know that you are interested in playing a part in this review and a collaborative review can be developed. This can also lead to a high quality review being written in a reduced amount of time.

· Check the GBD Injury Group Website as sited above to determine the situation on the topic of interest. Register your interest in a topic and the people you are going to be working with and whether you wish to find assistance with data collection or analysis with other members through either Claire Bryan-Hancock or James Harrison (email addresses as sited above).

· A great place to start for both preliminary literature and an extended definition of the injury in regards to GBD terms is the “health states” or “GBD sequelea” documents. These can be found at the end of the following web page in word document form:

http://sites.google.com/site/gbdinjuryexpertgroup/Home/discussion-3-sequelae-definition

Step 2 – Initial Literature Search

In this process the researcher will be using documents 1 and 2 within this package. Prior to the search it is useful to look at the literature used in the “health states” document for the particular injury as they may provide useful information.

· Conduct an initial search using broad key words. The results of this search can be transferred to an Endnote Library for ease in assessing the suitability of the resulting literature. The databases used and key words can be recorded in the lit search map (document 2).

· How to assess suitability: Firstly the article needs to assess the injury in which you are interested. The article should look at a population sample rather than a clinical sample, particularly when assessing the incidence and prevalence rates. Clinical samples can be useful however, in determining the duration of injury. Whilst articles that discuss the injury in general terms can be useful in gaining knowledge about the injury in question, they are not particularly relevant to the question that is being asked within this project and articles discussing the population incidence and prevalence rates are the most useful resources. Articles discussing outcome can be utilised when looking at duration of injury. In some cases data for a country may only be available in the form of an incidence rate for a certain age group (e.g., children or adults) this data may still be useful in the project, as age is one of the variables that is being analysed. This data can also be valuable if there is no other data available for that particular country or region. Articles that provide this information, yet are in a language that you do not speak should also be kept. It is possible that a member of the Injury Group may have the ability to read that language and can therefore decipher the incidence/prevalence rate. The dates of the articles should range between 1980 and the present.

· Once a list of potential literature has been made it is then possible to trace the full text documents. This can be done through utilising a selection of literature databases in order to find a link to the document in full.

· Searches using similar or more refined key words can be performed in differing databases. When performing new searches remember to record the key words and databases used for future reference. The process of assessing suitability should be performed on each new batch of articles.

· The reference lists within useful documents that have previously been read can also be a great place to find articles relevant to the injury that is being researched.

Step 3 – Short-listing Articles

In this process you will be using documents 2 and 3 within the Literature Review Package. It is helpful to utilise these documents whilst the articles are being read as it means that you are able to keep track of which countries and regions there is available data for, and the articles in which the information has been found.

· Once the full text articles which seem relevant have been found it is time to begin the process of reading them through.

· Some articles may have seemed relevant within the initial screening process, yet on further examination are not. These articles that can not be used within the literature review should be disregarded, unless there is use for them in subsequent reviews or the possibility that you may need some of the information at a later date.

· Whilst reading through the literature it is important to document which countries you have found data for. If there are any countries or regions that do not have any data recorded within the literature that is being read, another search using the country and the injury as key words can be conducted. In some cases it is advisable that this be done in the same way that the initial search was carried out, using a selection of differing databases. This can ensure that if an article combining these key words exists, it is likely to be found.

· At the end of this process there should be a short list of articles that have been read with initial incidence rates or injury duration extracted. Useful information other than simply rates and injury duration should also be kept note of for use in the literature review.

· The full text articles should be kept on hand.

· Throughout this process it may be useful to keep track of data and literature in the form of a flow chart as depicted in the Figure below. This Figure is from pg. 125 of the Global Burden of Disease Operations Manual, January 20, 2009.

Figure 1 Sample Literature Review and Data Abstraction Flow Chart

*This flow chart example is taken directly from the Global Burden of Disease Operations Manual, Final Draft January 20, 2009 (pg. 125).

Step 4 – Criteria for Abstraction Process

In this section document 5 should be used in order to determine the quality of the data and articles that have been short listed for use in the literature review.

· When looking at the data from each article it is important to keep track of:

(1) The study design that has been used

(2) The population that is being studied and the setting in which it is occurring

(3) The methods used by the researchers to ascertain deaths or morbidity

· Using document 5 that can be found within this literature review package, assess the quality of the article which is reporting the data useful to the project, and the data itself. When this has been done it is recommended that two investigators undertake an assessment and data abstraction of at least a few of the same articles. This is to ensure reliability in the assessment of relevancy and quality of articles and in the recording of data.

· Data should be considered in higher regard depending on the quality of the article from which it came.

· The population should also be considered when looking at the data. Researchers need to assess whether the data is an estimate of the whole country which it is aiming to represent or simply a town, city or suburb within this country. This should be recorded. Data that estimates incidence or prevalence for the whole country, if considered to be of good quality should be used as a first preference.

· The year of data estimation should be considered. In some countries the incidence rates of injury change considerably each year. In some cases safety measures have been implemented by governments after the data on certain injury rates has been recorded, in these instances data should be approached with caution. When estimating the burden of a specific injury the year of data collection needs to be carefully analysed so that data most closely representative of the year of estimation for the Global Burden of Disease Project is used.

· Within the literature keep an eye out for information that could explain incidence rates. For example one article may indicate that a certain country does not have a law that requires the use of a seatbelt when driving a motor vehicle. This could be a possible reason for an increased rate of certain injuries within that country.

· Information should also be sought that looks into the healthcare availability within the country of interest. This can help to understand and explain morbidity and mortality rates.

· Keep track of how the data is recorded. If data on incidence is estimated through hospital data or the rate of hospitalisations in a country where there is limited health care and many inhabitants can not gain access to it, this can limit the validity of the data.

Step 5 – Literature Review Write-up

All researchers and members of the Injury Expert Group who contributed to the writing and development of the literature review will have their name accredited within the document. Main contributors and authors will be acknowledged in order of contribution level. Within this step document 6 will be used as the basis for a table that documents the incidence and prevalence rates by GBD region and to stipulate the way in which data should be recorded and reported. It is also suggested that the GBD Operations Manual, Chapter 19 be referred to whilst writing the review as this manual suggests certain specifications for the completion of GBD reviews.

· Use document 6 to report the incidence and prevalence rates that have been found for each GBD region. This table or a modification of this table will be used within the final literature review to assess the incidence and prevalence rates by region.

· A detailed introduction to the review should consider the exact operational definition of the injury that is being assessed. It is important that the definition of this injury coincides with the working definition used in the GBD project. If unsure refer to the GBD “health states” on the Injury Group website: http://sites.google.com/site/gbdinjuryexpertgroup/Home/discussion-3-sequelae-definition

· For detailed descriptions on how to approach the methods and results section please refer to the Global Burden of Disease Operations Manual, Chapter 19 pg. 123-124. A summary of these descriptions is referred to within this document.

· The methods section should encompass some of the information collected on the Literature Review Map (document 2). Within the methods section, the databases used, literature found and shortlisted should be reported.

· The results section should report the results found at each stage of the analysis and by age, gender and country where possible.

· To ensure that the literature review is of a high quality it is possible to assess the literature review that has just been written using the quality assessment that was applied to the articles used in the review process.