Search

Systematic reviews are necessary to synthesize available evidence and inform clinical practice and health policy decisions. There has been an explosion of evidence available in many fields; this makes it challenging to keep evidence syntheses up to date and useful. Comparative effectiveness systematic reviews are informative; however, producing these often-large reviews bring intense time and resource demands. This commentary describes the implementation of a systematic review using a collaborative model of evidence synthesis. We are implementing the collaborative review model to update a large Cochrane review investigating the efficacy and comparative effectiveness of the design, delivery, and type of exercise treatment for people with chronic low-back pain. Three key benefits of the collaborative review model for evidence synthesis are (1) team coordination and collaboration, (2) quality control measures, and (3) advanced comparative and other analyses. This new collaborative review model is developed and implemented to produce and share high-quality, comparative evidence more efficiently while building capacity and community within a research field.

Objectives To estimate the effectiveness and safety of Pain Neurophysiology Education (PNE) on pain, disability, and psychological distress at post-intervention and long-term (closest to twelve months after initiating the intervention) in musculoskeletal pain (MSKP). Methods Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) were identified in six engines, reference lists, ClinicalTrials.gov, and by contacting key researches. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Meta-analyses, using Restricted Maximum Likelihood Method, were conducted to estimate standardized mean differences (SMD) and overall quality of evidence was evaluated according to GRADE. Results In total, 18 RCTs (n = 1,585) were included. There was small to moderate effects of PNE on pain at post-intervention and long-term: SMD = -0.32 (95% confidence interval [CI]: −.58; −.05) and SMD = −0.40 (95% CI: −.78; −.03), respectively. On disability, PNE had a small effect at post-intervention: SMD = -0.17 (95% CI: −.34; −.01) but was insignificant at long-term: SMD = −0.27 (95% CI: −.59; .06). Likewise, there was a small to moderate effect on psychological distress at post-intervention: SMD = −0.36 (95% CI: −.67; −.06) but was insignificant at long-term: SMD = −0.37 (95% CI: −.75; .01). Quality of evidence was low across all outcomes. Additional analyses showed significant effects of PNE, corresponding to moderate effects, on pain and psychological distress at both time points in chronic MSKP. Conclusions Overall quality of evidence was low, supporting PNE being safe and having small to moderate effects on pain at both time points, and on disability as well as psychological distress at post-intervention.