intermediate or long term for a population will be guided by the published evidence, the NTWC and COMET. To avoid unit-of-analysis issues associated with repeated observations (see Section 3.3.9), data from a single time point will be selected for each outcome, as determined by the NTWC during outcome prioritisation. Where multiple timepoints are considered critical or important to decisionmaking (e.g. short- and long-term remission in symptoms), separate outcomes will be specified for each timepoint. Research Protocol HTANALYSTS | NHMRC | EVIDENCE EVALUATION ON THE CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS OF SHIATSU 22 3.2 Search methods for identification of studies 3.2.1 Electronic searches The literature search strategy (see Appendix A) was developed in Ovid (for Embase, MEDLINE, and Emcare) based on the key element of research question (i.e. the intervention). The search is not limited by population or outcome, but rather by study type; with methodological filters for identifying SRs, RCTs, and NRSIs and exclusions for publication types developed and published previously (44). In developing the search strategy, we appraised and adapted the relevant search strategies provided in the 2015 Review; with recent systematic reviews identified in the scoping report and studies suggested by the NTWC also reviewed to identify other potentially relevant concepts. Terms or concepts proven not suitable were removed and other terms added. No date, language or geographic limitations will be applied when conducting the search. Non-English databases will not be searched. The search strategy will be adapted to suit the required syntax for the electronic bibliographic databases outlined in Table 3. Table 3 Electronic bibliographic databases to be searched 3.2.2 Other sources Reference lists of key relevant articles will be checked to identify any additional studies not identified through searches of the primary databases. The public will also be invited by the Department to submit references for published research evidence (not examined in the 2015 Review) through a public call for evidence. Research Protocol HTANALYSTS | NHMRC | EVIDENCE EVALUATION ON THE CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS OF SHIATSU 23 Grey literature is excluded, the exception being evidence reviews commissioned by Australian government bodies and other national or international bodies that are recommended by NTREAP or committee members, noting that systematic reviews of primary studies are only eligible for inclusion where the intervention is specified as ‘acupressure’ (see Section 3.1.3). For ‘shiatsu’, any recommended evidence reviews will be used as a source for identifying primary studies not identified through electronic searches. Research Protocol HTANALYSTS | NHMRC | EVIDENCE EVALUATION ON THE CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS OF SHIATSU 24 3.3 Data collection and analysis In the first instance the evidence reviews will aim to assess the full breadth of eligible studies. However, where the scope of the review becomes unmanageable (as determined post screening i.e. an unmanageable number of eligible citations/ populations), the scope will be narrowed to focus analysis and synthesis of evidence on populations and conditions relevant to Shiatsu practice in Australia, with a focus on evidence evaluating shiatsu first and foremost, augmented with evidence evaluating acupressure. NHMRC’s NTWC will advise on the populations and conditions of interest after considering a blinded list of all eligible populations and conditions post-screening. Populations and conditions will be selected based on objective data about practice in the Australian context (e.g. practitioner or patient surveys that report reasons for use in Australia), where possible. Evidence for populations and conditions not prioritised for synthesis, will be listed in an evidence inventory to ensure that all eligible evidence is catalogued. Included studies will be critically appraised, appropriate data extracted into data extraction tables, and the results analysed and summarised into appropriate categories according to identified populations, conditions and comparators. Summary of Findings tables will be developed for up to seven critical and important outcomes, guided by the GRADE framework. 3.3.1 Inclusion decisions Studies identified in the literature searches Title/abstract screening Citations (title/abstracts) retrieved by the literature searches will be imported into EndNote and duplicates removed. Citations will then be imported to Covidence (www.covidence.org), an online tool that streamlines the screening and data extraction stages of a systematic review. Screening will be staged according to study design, starting with screening of SRs (for acupressure), then RCTs (for shiatsu), followed by NRSIs (for shiatsu). Each citation (titles and abstract) will be screened by one evidence reviewer who will discard ineligible studies (marked as irrelevant and tagged with a reason for exclusion) and retain those with relevant data or information (marked as relevant or maybe). Where there is uncertainty regarding eligibility, a decision will be made through discussion with the lead reviewer, who will either decide to mark the citation as irrelevant or take it through to full text. Citations that are in a language other than English will be tagged and managed as described below under ‘Studies published in languages