Embedded Files
Appraisal of: "Walpole, S. C. (2019). Including papers in languages other than English in systematic reviews: important, feasible, yet often omitted. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 111, 127–134."
Appraisal of: "Walpole, S. C. (2019). Including papers in languages other than English in systematic reviews: important, feasible, yet often omitted. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 111, 127–134."
Reviewer(s):
Alan Lovell
Sophie Robinson
MS Copilot
Full Reference:
Walpole, S. C. (2019). Including papers in languages other than English in systematic reviews: important, feasible, yet often omitted. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 111, 127–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.03.004.
Short description:
This commentary addresses the persistent exclusion of languages other than English (LOE) papers in systematic reviews (SRs), despite recommendations to include them. Drawing on published SRs and existing literature, Walpole outlines the value of LOE papers, which may offer unique insights or alter meta-analytic outcomes. The paper discusses the lack of comprehensive guidelines for including LOE papers and presents practical strategies for searching, screening, and analysing them. These include using online translation tools, leveraging multilingual colleagues, and employing professional translators when necessary.
The author emphasizes that removing language restrictions requires planning across all SR stages and should be documented in protocols. The commentary also highlights technological innovations in machine translation and calls for future research to validate screening tools and translation accuracy. Ultimately, Walpole argues that including LOE papers enhances the global relevance and rigor of SRs, especially in qualitative and global health research.
Limitations stated by the author(s):
There is a lack of comprehensive guidelines for including LOE papers in all stages of SRs.
Financial and time constraints often limit the inclusion of LOE papers.
Limitations stated by the reviewer(s):
The paper does not provide quantitative evidence on the impact of excluding LOE papers on SR outcomes.
Recommendations are largely based on anecdotal experience and secondary sources.
Study Type:
Commentary / Methodological Perspective
Related Chapters:
Tags:
Page updated
Report abuse