Larissa Shamseer's research while affiliated with St. Michael's Hospital and other places

Publications (119)

Article
Full-text available
Introduction Health inequities are defined as unfair and avoidable differences in health between groups within a population. Most health research is conducted through observational studies, which are able to offer real-world insights about etiology, healthcare policy/programme effectiveness and the impacts of socioeconomic factors. However, most pu...
Chapter
Reports of systematic reviews should transparently, completely, and accurately reflect what was done and what was found. This will facilitate optimal use, replication, and evaluation of systematic reviews by others. Several tools are available to guide the reporting of systematic reviews, including the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic revie...
Article
Uvod: Preporučene smjernice za izvještavanje u sustavnim pregledima i metaanalizama (engl. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses, PRISMA) prvi su put objavljene 2009. godine kako bi autorima sustavnih pregleda omogućile transparentno izvještavanje o predmetu istraživanja, korištenim metodama i dobivenim rezultatima. Tij...
Article
Full-text available
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the global imperative to address health inequities. Observational studies are a valuable source of evidence for real-world effects and impacts of implementing COVID-19 policies on the redistribution of inequities. We assembled a diverse global multi-disciplinary team to develop interim guidance for improving tr...
Article
A systematic review involves the identification, evaluation, and synthesis of the best-available evidence to provide an answer to a specific question. The "best-available evidence" is, in many cases, a peer-reviewed scientific article published in an academic journal that details the conduct and results of a scientific study. Any potential threat t...
Article
Background: Funded health research is being published in journals that many regard as "predatory", deceptive, and non-credible. We do not currently know whether funders provide guidance on how to select a journal in which to publish funded health research. Methods: We identified the largest 46 philanthropic, public, development assistance, public-p...
Article
Background: Funded health research is being published in journals that many regard as “predatory”, deceptive, and non-credible. We do not currently know whether funders provide guidance on how to select a journal in which to publish funded health research. Methods: We identified the largest 46 philanthropic, public, development assistance, public-p...
Article
Full-text available
The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was developed to facilitate transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews an...
Article
Full-text available
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update t...
Article
Full-text available
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update t...
Article
COVID-19 has disproportionately placed women in academic science on the frontlines of domestic and clinical care compared to men. As a result, women in science are publishing less and potentially acquiring less funding during COVID-19 than compared to before. This widens the pre-existing gap between men and women in prevailing, publication-based me...
Article
Full-text available
Background The Campbell Collaboration undertakes systematic reviews of the effects of social and economic policies (interventions) to help policymakers, practitioners, and the public to make well‐informed decisions about policy interventions. In 2010, the Cochrane Collaboration and the Campbell Collaboration developed a voluntary co‐registration po...
Article
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update t...
Article
Full-text available
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update t...
Article
Background: Funded health research is being published in journals that many regard as “predatory”, deceptive, and non-credible. We do not currently know whether funders provide guidance on how to select a journal in which to publish funded health research. Methods: We identified the largest 46 philanthropic, public, development assistance, public-p...
Article
Objectives To describe the processes used to update the PRISMA 2009 statement for reporting systematic reviews, present results of a survey conducted to inform the update, summarise decisions made at the PRISMA update meeting, and describe and justify changes made to the guideline. Methods We reviewed 60 documents with reporting guidance for syste...
Preprint
The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was developed to facilitate transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews an...
Preprint
Background: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did and what they found. Over the last decade, there have been many advances in systematic review methodology and terminolo...
Preprint
Objectives: To describe the processes used to update the PRISMA 2009 statement for reporting systematic reviews, present results of a survey conducted to inform the update, summarise decisions made at the PRISMA update meeting, and describe and justify changes made to the guideline.Methods: We reviewed 60 documents with reporting guidance for syste...
Article
Full-text available
This is a protocol for a co‐registered Cochrane and Campbell Review (Methodology). The objectives are as follows: To identify, describe and assess methods for: when to replicate a systematic review; how to replicate a systematic review.
Article
Full-text available
Background: When a journal receives a duplicate publication, the ability to identify the submitted work as previously published, and reject it, is an assay to publication ethics best practices. The aim of this study was to evaluate how three different types of journals, namely open access (OA) journals, subscription-based journals, and presumed pr...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose Trustworthy reporting of quadrivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine trials is the foundation for assessing the vaccine’s risks and benefits. However, several pivotal trial publications incompletely reported important methodological details and inaccurately described the formulation that the control arms received. Under the Restoring In...
Article
Randomised clinical trials are the preferred method for establishing average intervention effects for groups. Using key methodological elements of these trials, n-of-1 trials provide rigorous evidence of intervention effects for individuals. N-of-1 trials are particularly useful for situations where randomised clinical trials are not always feasibl...
Preprint
Background: When a journal receives a duplicate publication the ability to identify the submitted work as previously published, and reject it, is an assay to publication ethics best practices. The aim of this study was to evaluate how three different types of journals, namely open access (OA) journals, subscription-based journals, and presumed pred...
Article
Objectives: To generate a comprehensive bank of systematic review (SR) reporting items to inform an update of the PRISMA 2009 statement. Methods: We searched the EQUATOR Network library in May 2019 to identify all reporting guidelines for SRs that were published after 2009, regardless of the scope of the guideline. We also conducted a selective...
Article
There is substantial evidence that research studies reported in the scientific literature do not provide adequate information so that readers know exactly what was done and what was found. This problem has been addressed by the development of reporting guidelines which tell authors what should be reported and how it should be described. Many report...
Article
Full-text available
Background The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) was launched in February 2011 to increase transparency of systematic reviews (SRs). There have been few investigations of the content and use of the database. We aimed to investigate the number of PROSPERO registrations from inception to 2017, and website usage in th...
Chapter
Complete and transparent reporting is imperative when assessing the validity of reported treatment effects and other findings of health research. A study’s methods should be described in enough detail so that they can be replicated, the analyses should follow the protocol, and the results should be provided in sufficient detail to be incorporated i...
Article
p>Predatory journals are a global and growing problem contaminating all domains of science. A coordinated response by all stakeholders (researchers, institutions, funders, regulators and patients) will be needed to stop the influence of these illegitimate journals.</p
Article
Full-text available
Objectives: To investigate the application and interpretation of statistical analyses in a cross-section of systematic reviews (SRs) of therapeutic interventions, without restriction by journal, clinical condition, or specialty. Study design and setting: We evaluated a random sample of SRs assembled previously, which were indexed in MEDLINE® dur...
Article
Full-text available
Background Scientific editors are responsible for deciding which articles to publish in their journals. However, we have not found documentation of their required knowledge, skills, and characteristics, or the existence of any formal core competencies for this role. Methods We describe the development of a minimum set of core competencies for scie...
Article
Objective: To characterize methodological conduct, reporting, and quality of five knowledge synthesis (KS) approaches. Study design: Retrospective analysis of a convenience sample of 5 published databases: overview of reviews (n=74), scoping reviews (n=494), rapid reviews (n=84), systematic reviews (n=300), and network meta-analyses (NMA; n=456)...
Article
Full-text available
Objectives: To evaluate how often reproducible research practices, which allow others to recreate the findings of studies, given the original data, are used in systematic reviews (SRs) of biomedical research. Study design and setting: We evaluated a random sample of SRs indexed in MEDLINE® during February 2014, which focused on a therapeutic int...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Scientific editors (i.e., those who make decisions on the content and policies of a journal) have a central role in the editorial process at biomedical journals. However, very little is known about the training needs of these editors or what competencies are required to perform effectively in this role. Methods: We conducted a survey of...
Data
The dataset lists all of the training needs named by participants (regrouped into categories of similar items) in their respective lists of top 10 training needs from the survey of editors.
Data
The dataset is a summary of the data collected over the three rounds of the Delphi process. We considered items with 80% consensus of 4 or higher (out of 5) as "Included". and items with 90% consensus of 4.5 or higher as "Highly Ranked".
Article
Full-text available
Background The scholarly publication landscape is changing rapidly. We investigated whether the introduction of an institutional publications officer might help facilitate better knowledge of publication topics and related resources, and effectively support researchers to publish. Methods In September 2015, a purpose-built survey about researchers...
Data
Description of study measures used and corresponding raw (anonymous) participant data.
Article
Well-written and transparent case reports (1) reveal early signals of potential benefits, harms, and information on the use of resources; (2) provide information for clinical research and clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), and (3) inform medical education. High-quality case reports are more likely when authors follow reporting guidelines. During...
Article
Objective: Research waste has received considerable attention from the biomedical community. One noteworthy contributor is incomplete reporting in research publications. When detailing statistical methods and results, ensuring analytic methods and findings are completely documented improves transparency. For publications describing randomised tria...
Article
Full-text available
Background The Internet has transformed scholarly publishing, most notably, by the introduction of open access publishing. Recently, there has been a rise of online journals characterized as ‘predatory’, which actively solicit manuscripts and charge publications fees without providing robust peer review and editorial services. We carried out a cros...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Well-written and transparent case reports (1) reveal early signals of potential benefits, harms, and information on the use of resources; (2) provide information for clinical research and clinical practice guidelines, and (3) inform medical education. High-quality case reports are more likely when authors follow reporting guidelines. Du...
Article
Full-text available
We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural intervent...
Article
Full-text available
We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural intervent...
Article
Full-text available
Unlabelled: We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhaviou...
Article
Full-text available
Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012). Many such guidelines exist, and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008) provides suitable guidance for reporting between-groups interve...
Article
Full-text available
We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural intervent...
Article
Full-text available
Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012). Many such guidelines exist and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008) provides suitable guidance for reporting between-groups interven...
Article
Full-text available
Background The CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement provides a minimum standard set of items to be reported in published clinical trials; it has received widespread recognition within the biomedical publishing community. This research aims to provide an update on the endorsement of CONSORT by high impact medical journals....
Article
Full-text available
We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural intervent...
Article
Full-text available
We developed a reporting guideline to provide authors with guidance about what should be reported when writing a paper for publication in a scientific journal using a particular type of research design: the single-case experimental design. This report describes the methods used to develop the Single-Case Reporting guideline In BEhavioural intervent...
Data
Screening and data extraction forms. (DOCX)
Article
Full-text available
Background: Systematic reviews (SRs) can help decision makers interpret the deluge of published biomedical literature. However, a SR may be of limited use if the methods used to conduct the SR are flawed, and reporting of the SR is incomplete. To our knowledge, since 2004 there has been no cross-sectional study of the prevalence, focus, and comple...
Article
Full-text available
Scientific abstract: Reporting guidelines, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement, improve the reporting of research in the medical literature (Turner et al., 2012). Many such guidelines exist and the CONSORT Extension to Nonpharmacological Trials (Boutron et al., 2008) provides suitable guidance for reporting b...
Article
Full-text available
Single-case experimental design (SCED) studies in the behavioral sciences literature are not only common, but their proportion has also increased over past decades. Moreover, methodological complexity of SCEDs and sophistication in the techniques used to analyze SCED data has increased apace. Yet recent reviews of the behavioral sciences literature...