Accepted author manuscript, 304 KB, Word document
Available under license: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Final published version
Licence: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Recommendations for the conduct of systematic reviews in toxicology and environmental health research (COSTER)
AU - Whaley, Paul
AU - Aiassa, Elisa
AU - Beausoleil, Claire
AU - Beronius, Anna
AU - Bilotta, Gary S.
AU - Boobis, Alan
AU - de Vries, Rob B. M.
AU - Hanberg, Annika
AU - Hoffmann, Sebastian
AU - Hunt, Neil
AU - Kwiatkowski, Carol F.
AU - Lam, Juleen
AU - Lipworth, Steven
AU - Martin, Olwenn
AU - Randall, Nicola
AU - Rhomberg, Lorenz
AU - Rooney, Andrew
AU - Schunemann, Holger J.
AU - Wikoff, Daniele
AU - Wolffe, Taylor
AU - Halsall, Crispin
PY - 2020/10/1
Y1 - 2020/10/1
N2 - BackgroundThere are several standards that offer explicit guidance on good practice in systematic reviews (SRs) for the medical sciences; however, no similarly comprehensive set of recommendations has been published for SRs that focus on human health risks posed by exposure to environmental challenges, chemical or otherwise.ObjectivesTo develop an expert, cross-sector consensus view on a key set of recommended practices for the planning and conduct of SRs in the environmental health sciences.MethodsA draft set of recommendations was derived from two existing standards for SRs in biomedicine and developed in a consensus process, which engaged international participation from government, industry, non-government organisations, and academia. The consensus process consisted of a workshop, follow-up webinars, email discussion and bilateral phone calls.ResultsThe Conduct of Systematic Reviews in Toxicology and Environmental Health Research (COSTER) recommendations cover 70 SR practices across eight performance domains. Detailed explanations for specific recommendations are made for those identified by the authors as either being novel to SR in general, specific to the environmental health SR context, or potentially controversial to environmental health SR stakeholders.DiscussionCOSTER provides a set of recommendations that should facilitate the production of credible, high-value SRs of environmental health evidence, and advance discussion of a number of controversial aspects of conduct of EH SRs. Key recommendations include the management of conflicts of interest, handling of grey literature, and protocol registration and publication. A process for advancing from COSTER’s recommendations to developing a formal standard for EH SRs is also indicated.
AB - BackgroundThere are several standards that offer explicit guidance on good practice in systematic reviews (SRs) for the medical sciences; however, no similarly comprehensive set of recommendations has been published for SRs that focus on human health risks posed by exposure to environmental challenges, chemical or otherwise.ObjectivesTo develop an expert, cross-sector consensus view on a key set of recommended practices for the planning and conduct of SRs in the environmental health sciences.MethodsA draft set of recommendations was derived from two existing standards for SRs in biomedicine and developed in a consensus process, which engaged international participation from government, industry, non-government organisations, and academia. The consensus process consisted of a workshop, follow-up webinars, email discussion and bilateral phone calls.ResultsThe Conduct of Systematic Reviews in Toxicology and Environmental Health Research (COSTER) recommendations cover 70 SR practices across eight performance domains. Detailed explanations for specific recommendations are made for those identified by the authors as either being novel to SR in general, specific to the environmental health SR context, or potentially controversial to environmental health SR stakeholders.DiscussionCOSTER provides a set of recommendations that should facilitate the production of credible, high-value SRs of environmental health evidence, and advance discussion of a number of controversial aspects of conduct of EH SRs. Key recommendations include the management of conflicts of interest, handling of grey literature, and protocol registration and publication. A process for advancing from COSTER’s recommendations to developing a formal standard for EH SRs is also indicated.
KW - Systematic review
KW - Research standards
KW - Research synthesis methods
KW - Health assessment
KW - Meta-analysis
KW - Environmental health
KW - Toxicology
KW - Epidemiology
U2 - 10.1016/j.envint.2020.105926
DO - 10.1016/j.envint.2020.105926
M3 - Journal article
VL - 143
JO - Environment International
JF - Environment International
SN - 0160-4120
M1 - 105926
ER -