Abstract
Introduction Observational studies are fraught with several biases including reverse causation and residual confounding, which may limit the credibility of reported associations. Overview of reviews of observational studies (i.e., umbrella reviews) synthesize systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses of cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort studies, and may also aid in the grading of the credibility of reported associations. The number of published umbrella reviews has been increasing at a rapid pace. Recently, a reporting guideline for overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions (PRIOR, Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of Reviews) was published, but the field lacks reporting guidelines for umbrella reviews of observational studies. Thus, our aim is to develop a reporting guideline for umbrella reviews on cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort studies assessing epidemiological associations.
Methods and Analyses We will adhere to established guidance on how to develop reporting guidelines in health research and follow four steps to prepare a PRIOR extension for systematic reviews of cross-sectional, case-control, and cohort studies testing epidemiological associations between an exposure and an outcome, namely Preferred Reporting Items for Umbrella Reviews of Cross-sectional, Case-control, and Cohort studies (PRIUR-CCC).
Step 1 will be the project launch to identify stakeholders. Step 2 will be a literature review of available guidance to conduct umbrella reviews. Step 3 will be a Delphi study sampling authors and editors of umbrella reviews, Delphi surveys and checklists of epidemiological studies, as well as funders, practitioners, and policy makers, which will be conducted in three rounds. Step 4 will encompass the finalization of PRIUR-CCC statement, including a checklist, a flow diagram, explanation, and elaboration document. Deliverables of each step will be as follows. First, identifying stakeholders to involve according to relevant expertise and end-user groups, with an equity, diversity, and inclusion lens. Second, completing a narrative review of methodological guidance on how to conduct umbrella reviews, a narrative review of methodology and reporting in published umbrella reviews, and preparing an initial PRIUR-CCC checklist for Delphi study Round 1. Third, preparing a PRIUR-CCC checklist with guidance after Delphi study. Fourth, publishing and disseminating PRIUR-CCC statement.
Ethics and Dissemination PRIUR-CCC will guide reporting of umbrella reviews on epidemiological associations, with the aim to improve quantitative, credible, and transparent reporting, in a field of evidence synthesis where there is important methodological heterogeneity of reviews, and where sources of bias in original observational studies can lead to misleading conclusions.
Strengths
This is the first protocol for reporting guidance of umbrella reviews of epidemiological associations
This protocol follows the guidance for reporting checklist, which are standard in the field.
This protocol is urgently needed given the large number of umbrella reviews on epidemiological associations emerging across different branches of science
Competing Interest Statement
MS received honoraria/has been a consultant for Angelini, Lundbeck, Otsuka. SCo declares honoraria and reimbursement for travel and accommodation expenses for lectures from the following non-profit associations: Association for Child and Adolescent Central Health (ACAMH), Canadian ADHD Alliance Resource (CADDRA), and the British Association of Pharmacology (BAP) for educational activity on ADHD. All other co-authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
Clinical Protocols
Funding Statement
LH is supported by a Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Synthesis and Translation. This research received no other specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
We have submitted this protocol to The Ottawa Health Science Network- Research Ethics Board and have obtained consent (20220639-01H).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All study data and materials, including the protocol, will be publicly available on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/cpty5) as well as in the published paper(s).