The Systematic Review Data Repository (SRDR): descriptive characteristics of publicly available data and opportunities for research
Abstract
BackgroundConducting systematic reviews (“reviews”) requires a great deal of effort and resources. Making data extracted during reviews available publicly could offer many benefits, including reducing unnecessary duplication of effort, standardizing data, supporting analyses to address secondary research questions, and facilitating methodologic research. Funded by the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the Systematic Review Data Repository (SRDR) is a free, web-based, open-source, data management and archival platform for reviews. Our specific objectives in this paper are to describe (1) the current extent of usage of SRDR and (2) the characteristics of all projects with publicly available data on the SRDR website.MethodsWe examined all projects with data made publicly available through SRDR as of November 12, 2019. We extracted information about the characteristics of these projects. Two investigators extracted and verified the data.ResultsSRDR has had 2552 individual user accounts belonging to users from 80 countries. Since SRDR’s launch in 2012, data have been made available publicly for 152 of the 735 projects in SRDR (21%), at a rate of 24.5 projects per year, on average. Most projects are in clinical fields (144/152 projects; 95%); most have evaluated interventions (therapeutic or preventive) (109/152; 72%). The most frequent health areas addressed are mental and behavioral disorders (31/152; 20%) and diseases of the eye and ocular adnexa (23/152;…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Contribution of social science to large scale biodiversity conservation: A review of research about the Natura 2000 network
- The alignment of agricultural and nature conservation policies in the European Union
- Determination of ecological significance based on geostatistical assessment: a case study from the Slovak Natura 2000 protected area
- Routledge Handbook of the Study of the Commons
- Farmers' acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes: A German perspective
- Approaches to Identify the Value of Seminatural Habitats for Conservation Biological Control
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.