T managers. An interview guide, such as 11 open-ended questions, facilitated the informal discussions. The objectives in the discussions had been to collect insights in the experiences of EPCs in integrating existingsource of relevant literature and as context for the introduction or discussion section of testimonials. Existing critiques had been most useful when crucial concerns and/or PICOTS-SD (population, intervention, comparator, outcome, time frame, setting, and study style) matched or when they addressed a particular subquestion with the new critique. Employing existing reviews was frequently more resource intensive than completing a critique from scratch. EPCs expressed that they generally didn’t trust elements of reviews carried out by others. When relevant and rigorous, incorporating prior reviews into the review becoming undertaken by the EPC was clearly valuable in at the least two instances: 1) allowing larger scope in the evaluation being undertaken IQ-1 without having further resources, or 2) providingRobinson et al. Systematic Testimonials 2014, three:60 http://www.systematicreviewsjournal.com/content/3/1/Page 3 ofStep 1. Find current SR(s)Existing SR(s)?YesStep two. Assess relevance o Questions o Solutions o Search datesRelevant SR(s)?NoYesStop. Proceed with SR of key evidence Use “almost” relevant SRs to frame and offer context (Contextual Use) Scan References of “almost” relevant SRs to check new search resultsStep 3. Assess top quality of existing SR(s)Enough High quality?NoYesScan references, verify new search resultsStep four. Ascertain acceptable use and incorporate existing SR(s) ANDUse existing searchUse current information abstraction, study-level threat of bias assessments and/or synthesisStep 5. Report methods and final results from applying existing SR(s)Use full reviewFigure 1 Methodological steps in applying current systematic critiques (SRs).summarized evidence when a new in depth assessment of major literature would not be feasible (for example, existing testimonials provide individual patient data analysis or incorporate a huge selection of trials, supplemented by author-provided information). EPCs have used current evaluations in different methods, most normally as a source of relevant literature, permitting them to lower the extent of browsing to locate major literature or to check completeness of primary literature search techniques. On top of that, prior testimonials are oftenused to supply context for the introduction or discussion sections of a review. At a minimum, most EPC members feel that it’s necessary to acknowledge other systematic testimonials and to put the findings on the present overview in to the context of other systematic reviews, especially in the case of disagreements or controversy. EPC members noted that solutions figuring out when and how to use an existing overview are highly dependent around the subject and scope in the new report. You’ll find specific situations when it might be most feasible to work with an existing evaluation as evidence inside a new overview. One example is,Robinson et al. Systematic Testimonials 2014, three:60 http://www.systematicreviewsjournal.com/content/3/1/Page 4 ofTable 1 Definitions of terms employed in FigureLocate current SR(s) A defined and reproducible approach to efficiently determine current systematic testimonials for probable use in conducting a newly proposed systematic overview, including updates. Assess relevance Strategies by which existing systematic reviews identified in Step 1 might be evaluated as to no matter if they are equivalent adequate for the newly proposed critique to PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21106918 obviate the need to have for conducting one particular or numerous actions in unde.