Withdrawals of Cochrane systematic reviews: a description of reasons

ID: 

115

Session: 

Poster session 1

Date: 

Sunday 16 September 2018 - 12:30 to 14:00

All authors in correct order:

Perales-Guerrero L1, Delgado-Figueroa N1, Colunga-Lozano LE2, Pérez-Gaxiola G3
1 Cochrane Mexico, University of Guadalajara, Mexico
2 Cochrane México, McMaster University, Department of Health Related Methods, Evidence and Impact, Canada
3 Cochrane México, Hospital Pediátrico de Sinaloa, Mexico
Presenting author and contact person

Presenting author:

Leonardo Perales-Guerrero

Contact person:

Leonardo Perales-Guerrero
Netzahualpilli Delgado-Figueroa
Luis Enrique Colunga-Lozano
Giordano Pérez-Gaxiola
Abstract text
Background:
Demand for Cochrane systematic reviews (CSR) has increased in the past five years, however, the withdrawal rate also has experienced a parallel phenomenon. Withdrawals may be a concern because they represent wasted time and resources for authors, editors and consumers.

Objectives:
The aim of this study is to describe the reasons for withdrawing a CSR.

Methods:
We conducted an electronic literature search from 1996 to 2018 using the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). One reviewer collected all the information through a reference manager. Two reviewers independently determined the reasons for withdrawal, The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software.

Results:
We identified 706 CSR: 377 (53.4%) reviews, 324 (45.9%) protocols and five (0.7%) without an identifiable type. The number of withdrawn reviews from 1996 to 2013 ranged from one to 25 per year. From 2014 to 2018 the number of withdrawals increased (2014, N = 78; 2015, N = 114; 2016, N = 139, 2017, N = 131, 2018, N = 24). The reason for withdrawal was made by the editorial team in 69.3% (N = 489) of cases, and by authors in 18.1% ( N = 128). For the rest this information was not found (10.2%, N = 72) or not reported (2.4%, N =17). The main reasons for editorial teams to withdraw a CSR was lack of progress (29%). Other common reasons were outdated reviews (27.2%), inclusion in a new CSR (14.9%), and non compliance with Cochrane methodology (6.9%). The main reasons for authors to withdraw a CSR was lack of time to complete the CSR (83.7%, N = 128).

Conclusions:
Our results showed that the main reasons for editorial units to withdraw CSR were either lack of progress or the review becoming outdated. The main reason for withdrawal by authors was a lack of time to complete the CSR.

Patient or healthcare consumer involvement:
CSR are used in the healthcare setting to improve the decision-making process, the importance of this research is indirect to the patients and health consumers because they are at the end of the road of the application of evidence. By understanding why the CSR are being withdrawn, we can make the evidence reach the patients and consumers

Attachments: 

Image icon Figure 1.png
PDF icon Figure 2.pdf

Relevance to patients and consumers: 

Cochrane Systematic Reviews are used in the healthcare setting to improve the decision-making process, the importance of this research is indirect to the patients and health consumers because they are at the end of the road of the application of evidence. By understanding why the CSR are being withdrawn, we can make the evidence reach the patients and consumers.