This is the old version of SRDR. The next, SRDRplus is available! Registration of your SRDRPlus account is free and approval is automatic. Click Here to register an SRDRPlus account.

Advanced Search

Completed Systematic Reviews




Labor Dystocia


Public Project Complete

Statistics: 158 Studies, 9 Key Questions, 1 Extraction Form,
Date Published: Feb 27, 2020 06:46PM
Description: Objectives: This review evaluates the comparative effectiveness of different strategies for treating labor dystocia in women with otherwise uncomplicated pregnancies. Data Sources: We searched PubMed®, Embase®, CINAHL®, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), limiting the searches to studies in the English-language and comparative studies published from January 1, 2005, to February 15,2019. Review Methods: Two investigators screened each abstract and full-text article for inclusion, abstracted data, rated quality and applicability, and graded evidence. When possible, random-effects models were used to compute summary estimates of effects.
Contributor(s): Evan R. Myers, M.D., M.P.H. Gillian D Sanders Ph.D. Remy R. Coeytaux, M.D., Ph.D. Kara A. McElligott, M.D., M.P.H. Patricia G. Moorman, Ph.D., M.S.P.H. Karen Hicklin, Ph.D. Chad Grotegut, M.D., M.H.SC. Margaret Villers, M.D. Adam Goode, DPT, Ph.D. Hilary Campbell, Pharm.D., J.D. Deanna Befus, Ph.D. Amanda J. McBroom, Ph.D. J. Kelly Davis, B.A. Kathryn Lallinger, M.S.L.S. Robyn Fortman, B.A. Andrzej Kosinski, Ph.D.
DOI: DOI pending.
Funding Source: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
Methodology Description: We searched PubMed®, Embase®, CINAHL®, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), limiting the searches to studies in the English-language and comparative studies published from January 1, 2005, to February15,2019. Two investigators screened each abstract and full-text article for inclusion, abstracted the data, and performed quality ratings and evidence grading. Random-effects models were used to compute summary estimates of effects. See the review protocol (https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/topics/labor-dystocia/research-protocol) for full details.

Zoom Preview | Show Downloadable Content

Impact of Community Health Worker Certification on Workforce and Service Delivery for Asthma and Other Selected Chronic Conditions


Public Project Complete

Statistics: 74 Studies, 2 Key Questions, 2 Extraction Forms,
Date Published: Jan 10, 2020 03:37PM
Description: Technical brief
Contributor(s): Wilson, McArthur, Ibe, Brodine
DOI: DOI pending.
Funding Source: AHRQ
Methodology Description: None Provided

Zoom Preview | Show Downloadable Content

Achieving Health Equity in Preventive Services


Public Project Complete

Statistics: 85 Studies, 5 Key Questions, 1 Extraction Form,
Date Published: Dec 18, 2019 03:34PM
Description: To summarize research on achieving health equity in ten preventive services for cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes in adults for a National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop by identifying the effects of impediments and barriers that create disparities and the effectiveness of interventions to reduce them.
Contributor(s): Heidi D. Nelson, M.D., M.P.H., M.A.C.P., F.R.C.P. Amy Cantor, M.D., M.P.H. Jesse Wagner, M.A. Rebecca Jungbauer, Dr.P.H., M.P.H, M.A. Ana Quiñones, Ph.D., M.S. Rongwei Fu, Ph.D. Lucy Stillman, B.S. Karli Kondo, Ph.D., M.A
DOI: DOI pending.
Funding Source: AHRQ Contract No. HHSA2902015000091
Methodology Description: Eligible abstracts and full-text articles were independently dual-reviewed for inclusion using pre-established criteria. Data were abstracted into evidence tables and verified for accuracy and completeness. Risk of bias and applicability of studies were independently dual-rated using established criteria; disagreements were resolved by consensus. Strength of evidence and applicability for each Key Question and outcome were assessed through consensus using established methods. A profile likelihood random effects model was used for meta-analysis.

Zoom Preview | Show Downloadable Content

Systematic reviews on interventions for corneal disease: What is the reliability of the evidence?


Public Project Complete

Statistics: 254 Studies, 1 Key Question, 1 Extraction Form,
Date Published: Nov 13, 2019 03:49PM
Description: Although a number of systematic reviews on corneal disease have been published, the reliability of these reviews remains unclear. We will characterize and appraise the methodological reliability of systematic reviews on interventions for corneal disease. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the current available evidence on interventions for corneal disease, state the strengths and limitations and formulate recommendations for improving future review conduct.
Contributor(s): None Provided
Funding Source: National Eye Institute
Methodology Description: None Provided

Zoom Preview | Show Downloadable Content

Dry Eye SRs


Public Project Complete

Statistics: 40 Studies, 1 Key Question, 1 Extraction Form,
Date Published: Nov 13, 2019 03:48PM
Description: Although a number of systematic reviews on dry eye have been published, the quality of these reviews remains unclear. We will characterize and appraise the methodological quality of systematic reviews on interventions for dry eye. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the current available evidence on interventions for dry eye, state the strengths and limitations and formulate recommendations for improving future review conduct.
Contributor(s): None Provided
Funding Source: National Eye Institute
Methodology Description: None Provided

Zoom Preview | Show Downloadable Content