Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol

Introduction Sometimes, observational studies may provide important evidence that allow inferences of causality between exposure and outcome (although on most occasions only low certainty evidence). Authors, frequently and perhaps usually at the behest of the journals to which they are submitting, a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gordon Guyatt, Mi Ah Han
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2020-07-01
Series:BMJ Open
Online Access:https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/7/e038571.full
id doaj-92f219f96bd945f4bad5ce0ad7079cf8
record_format Article
spelling doaj-92f219f96bd945f4bad5ce0ad7079cf82020-11-25T03:28:56ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552020-07-0110710.1136/bmjopen-2020-038571Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocolGordon Guyatt0Mi Ah Han1Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, CanadaDepartment of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, Chosun University, Gwangju, The Republic of KoreaIntroduction Sometimes, observational studies may provide important evidence that allow inferences of causality between exposure and outcome (although on most occasions only low certainty evidence). Authors, frequently and perhaps usually at the behest of the journals to which they are submitting, avoid using causal language when addressing evidence from observational studies. This is true even when the issue of interest is the causal effect of an intervention or exposure. Clarity of thinking and appropriateness of inferences may be enhanced through the use of language that reflects the issue under consideration. The objectives of this study are to systematically evaluate the extent and nature of causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies and to relate that to the actual intent of the investigation.Methods and analysis We will conduct a systematic survey of systematic reviews of observational studies addressing modifiable exposures and their possible impact on patient-important outcomes. We will randomly select 200 reviews published in 2019, stratified in a 1:1 ratio by use and non-use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Teams of two reviewers will independently assess study eligibility and extract data using a standardised data extraction forms, with resolution of disagreement by discussion and, if necessary, by third party adjudication. Through examining the inferences, they make in their papers’ discussion, we will evaluate whether the authors’ intent was to address causation or association. We will summarise the use of causal language in the study title, abstract, study question and results using descriptive statistics. Finally, we will assess whether the language used is consistent with the intention of the authors. We will determine whether results in reviews that did or did not use GRADE differ.Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval for this study is not required. We will disseminate the results through publication in a peer-reviewed journals.Registration Open Science Framework (osf.io/vh8yx).https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/7/e038571.full
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Gordon Guyatt
Mi Ah Han
spellingShingle Gordon Guyatt
Mi Ah Han
Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
BMJ Open
author_facet Gordon Guyatt
Mi Ah Han
author_sort Gordon Guyatt
title Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title_short Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title_full Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title_fullStr Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title_full_unstemmed Systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
title_sort systematic survey of the causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies: a study protocol
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
series BMJ Open
issn 2044-6055
publishDate 2020-07-01
description Introduction Sometimes, observational studies may provide important evidence that allow inferences of causality between exposure and outcome (although on most occasions only low certainty evidence). Authors, frequently and perhaps usually at the behest of the journals to which they are submitting, avoid using causal language when addressing evidence from observational studies. This is true even when the issue of interest is the causal effect of an intervention or exposure. Clarity of thinking and appropriateness of inferences may be enhanced through the use of language that reflects the issue under consideration. The objectives of this study are to systematically evaluate the extent and nature of causal language use in systematic reviews of observational studies and to relate that to the actual intent of the investigation.Methods and analysis We will conduct a systematic survey of systematic reviews of observational studies addressing modifiable exposures and their possible impact on patient-important outcomes. We will randomly select 200 reviews published in 2019, stratified in a 1:1 ratio by use and non-use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Teams of two reviewers will independently assess study eligibility and extract data using a standardised data extraction forms, with resolution of disagreement by discussion and, if necessary, by third party adjudication. Through examining the inferences, they make in their papers’ discussion, we will evaluate whether the authors’ intent was to address causation or association. We will summarise the use of causal language in the study title, abstract, study question and results using descriptive statistics. Finally, we will assess whether the language used is consistent with the intention of the authors. We will determine whether results in reviews that did or did not use GRADE differ.Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval for this study is not required. We will disseminate the results through publication in a peer-reviewed journals.Registration Open Science Framework (osf.io/vh8yx).
url https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/7/e038571.full
work_keys_str_mv AT gordonguyatt systematicsurveyofthecausallanguageuseinsystematicreviewsofobservationalstudiesastudyprotocol
AT miahhan systematicsurveyofthecausallanguageuseinsystematicreviewsofobservationalstudiesastudyprotocol
_version_ 1724581914562527232