Systematic reviews for Consultancy, Innovation & Knowledge Transfer in Health Care Research

Systematic reviews form the baisis of policy making in the UK and internationally. They are widely used to answer questions of efficacy by licensing decision makers and are an essential requirement of applications to reimbursement bodies such as NICE. They can also provide important information for strategic planning in industry.

Drawing on our extensive experience working with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre (NETSCC) , as well as multiple partners in industry, we offer a range of systematic reviews for consultancy and the NHS, tailored to the needs of our customers.

Our systematic reviews can focus on many study types, including RCTs, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional data, diagnostic studies, prognostic studies and qualitative studies. We can also provide mixed methods syntheses of qualitative and quantitative evidence.

If you would like to receive a quote for our services, please contact Phil Carver and provide us with as much of the following information as you have available or is relevant. We will then scope the review and provide you with a detailed protocol and estimated price. Turn around from request to quote is usually 2 weeks.

Scoping information

• Title of review

• Population of interest

• Intervention(s) of interest

• Comparators(s) of interest

• Outcome(s) to be included

• Study types to be included

• Indication of type of review (see list below)

• TIMESCALE (start date and end date)

Review products

Below is a list of types of review we offer as standard. However, these are an indication only, and can be adapted to requirements.

Broad systematic review: These reviews are produced to the standards required for a submission to reimbursement bodies such as NICE or submission to a peer reviewed journal, and can also provide important information for strategic planning in industy. They employ the highest standard of review methodologies. They can include multiple interventions, broadly or narrowly defined populations and multiple outcomes. Analysis can include narrative synthesis, meta analysis (quantitative) or meta synthesis (qualitative). Estimated time: 6 months

Narrow systematic review: These reviews are also produced to the standards outlined above, but are narrower in focus, e.g. looking only at RCTs, one intervention and fewer outcomes. Estimated time: 1 to 6 months, depending on available evidence

Systematic reviews to support network meta analysis/mixed treatment comparisons: This type of review is produced to the standards required for a submission to reimbursement bodies such as NICE or submission to a peer reviewed journal, and can also provide important information for strategic planning in industy. Where multiple interventions are to be compared to one another, a much wider and more comprehensive search and inclusion strategy is required to capture all relevant evidence. We recommend use of a clearly defined population, use of RCTs only, with clearly stated interventions and a network limited to an agreed level and agreed number of outcomes. Estimated time: at least 2 months

Review of systematic reviews: In areas where there are multiple systematic reviews already published, a quicker approach to inform strategy or plan a submission to NICE might be to review existing reviews. Estimated time: 1 to 2 months

Update of systematic review: These reviews are produced to the standards required for a submission to reimbursement bodies such as NICE or submission to a peer reviewed journal, and can also provide important information for strategic planning in industy. It can only be used to update existing high quality reviews. The search strategy is replicated from the date of the last search, and any new studies are data extracted and, if data allows, a new meta analysis or meta synthesis performed. Estimated time: 2 weeks to 1 month

Updating a review (quick): limited search strategy, or addition of known new data, such as data provided by funder. Estimated time: 1 -3 weeks

Rapid review: Where timescales are tight, a rapid review provides a methodologically transparent review, which includes limited search techniques, little or no quality assessment and limited data extraction. These reviews may miss some evidence. Estimated time: 1 to 3 months

Review of model parameters (systematic): Where a model parameter is key, or data is difficult to identify, a systematic search provides a high quality and accurate source of data. Includes quality assessment and data extraction. Estimated time: 1 week to 1 month

Review of model parameters (quick): As above, but limited searches, no quality assessment and focussed on one outcome. Transparent methods, but may miss some evidence. Estimated time: 1 week

Research reports: Where no synthesis of evidence is required. Research reports employ good quality searches, quality assessment and a summary of each study. Estimated time: 1 month to 3 months

Mapping reviews: to outline the available evidence in a broad healthcare topic, to gauge if a full systematic review is possible, or to identify research gaps . Include limited systematic searches, limited data extraction, and a variety of outputs which can include numerical or narrative summaries of available studies, their outcomes, study design, etc. Estimated time: 1 month to 3 months