Evidence Evaluation Process and Management of Potential Conflicts of Interest

2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations
      — H. James Harrington

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      Subscribe to Resuscitation
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Perkins G.D.
        • Neumar R.
        • Monsieurs K.G.
        • et al.
        The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation-Review of the last 25 years and vision for the future.
        Resuscitation. 2017; 121: 104-116https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.09.029
      1. International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Task Forces. https://www.ilcor.org/about-ilcor/task-forces/. Accessed August 11, 2020.

        • Hazinski M.F.
        • Nolan J.P.
        • Aickin R.
        • et al.
        Part 1: executive summary: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.
        Circulation. 2015; 132: S2-S39https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000270
        • Nolan J.P.
        • Hazinski M.F.
        • Aickin R.
        • et al.
        Part 1: executive summary: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations.
        Resuscitation. 2015; 95: e1-e31https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.07.039
        • Morley P.T.
        • Lang E.
        • Aickin R.
        • et al.
        Part 2: evidence evaluation and management of conflicts of interest: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.
        Circulation. 2015; 132: S40-S50https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000271
        • Morley P.T.
        • Lang E.
        • Aickin R.
        • et al.
        Part 2: evidence evaluation and management of conflicts of interest: 2015 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations.
        Resuscitation. 2015; 95: e33-e41https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2015.07.040
        • Ashoor H.M.
        • Lillie E.
        • Zarin W.
        • et al.
        Effectiveness of different compression-to-ventilation methods for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a systematic review.
        Resuscitation. 2017; 118: 112-125https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.05.032
        • Olasveengen T.M.
        • de Caen A.R.
        • Mancini M.E.
        • et al.
        2017 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations summary.
        Circulation. 2017; 136: e424-e440https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000541
        • Olasveengen T.M.
        • de Caen A.R.
        • Mancini M.E.
        • et al.
        2017 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations Summary.
        Resuscitation. 2017; 121: 201-214https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2017.10.021
        • Soar J.
        • Donnino M.W.
        • Maconochie I.
        • et al.
        2018 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations Summary.
        Circulation. 2018; 138: e714-e730https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000611
        • Soar J.
        • Donnino M.W.
        • Maconochie I.
        • et al.
        2018 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations summary.
        Resuscitation. 2018; 133: 194-206https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.10.017
        • Soar J.
        • Maconochie I.
        • Wyckoff M.H.
        • et al.
        2019 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations: Summary From the Basic Life Support; Advanced Life Support; Pediatric Life Support; Neonatal Life Support; Education, Implementation, and Teams; and First Aid Task Forces.
        Circulation. 2019; 140: e826-e880https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000734
        • Soar J.
        • Maconochie I.
        • Wyckoff M.H.
        • et al.
        2019 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.
        Resuscitation. 2019; 145: 95-150https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2019.10.016
      2. International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. ILCOR website home page. https://www.ilcor.org/home. Accessed August 11, 2020.

      3. International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Continuous evidence evaluation guidance and templates. https://www.ilcor.org/documents/continuous-evidence-evaluation-guidance-and-templates. Accessed August 11, 2020.

      4. International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). What is behind ILCOR? YouTube page. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7l9cwLX6Ec. Accessed August 11, 2020.

      5. International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Consensus on science with treatment recommendations. https://costr.ilcor.org/. Accessed August 11, 2020.

        • Institute of Medicine (US) Committee of Standards for Systematic Reviews of Comparative Effectiveness Research
        Eden J. Levit L. Berg A. Morton S. Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC2011
        • Cochrane Training
        Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 6.0. Chapter 10: analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses.
        2019 (https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-10. Updated July 2019. Accessed March 17, 2020)
      6. Cochrane Training. Introducing systematic reviews of prognosis studies to Cochrane: what and how? https://training.cochrane.org/resource/introducing-systematic-reviews-prognosis-studies-cochrane-what-and-how. Accessed August 11, 2020.

      7. Cochrane Methods Screening and Diagnostic Tests. Handbook for DTA reviews. https://methods.cochrane.org/sdt/handbook-dta-reviews. Accessed August 11, 2020.

      8. GRADE Handbook.
        in: Schünemann H. Brożek J. Guyatt G. Oxman A. 2013 (Accessed August 11, 2020)
      9. PRISMA Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) website. http://www.prisma-statement.org/. Accessed August 11, 2020.

        • Moher D.
        • Liberati A.
        • Tetzlaff J.
        • Altman D.G.
        • PRISMA Group
        Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
        BMJ. 2009; 339: b2535https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535
      10. International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation. Generic SR workflow. https://www.ilcor.org/data/generic_sr_workflow.xlsx. Accessed August 11, 2020.

        • Kleinman M.E.
        • Perkins G.D.
        • Bhanji F.
        • et al.
        ILCOR Scientific Knowledge Gaps and Clinical Research Priorities for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care: A Consensus Statement.
        Circulation. 2018; 137: e802-e819https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000561
        • Kleinman M.E.
        • Perkins G.D.
        • Bhanji F.
        • et al.
        ILCOR Scientific Knowledge Gaps and Clinical Research Priorities for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care: A Consensus Statement.
        Resuscitation. 2018; 127: 132-146https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.03.021
        • Alonso-Coello P.
        • Schünemann H.J.
        • Moberg J.
        • et al.
        GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: Introduction.
        BMJ. 2016; 353: i2016https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i2016
        • Alonso-Coello P.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Moberg J.
        • et al.
        GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 2: Clinical practice guidelines.
        BMJ. 2016; 353https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i2016
        • Nolan J.P.
        • Maconochie I.
        • Soar J.
        • et al.
        Executive summary: International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.
        Circulation. 2020; 142: S2-S27https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000890
        • Nolan J.P.
        • Maconochie I.
        • Soar J.
        • et al.
        Executive summary: International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.
        Resuscitation. 2020; 156: A1-A22
        • Tricco A.C.
        • Lillie E.
        • Zarin W.
        • et al.
        PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation.
        Ann Intern Med. 2018; 169: 467-473https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850
        • Haywood K.
        • Whitehead L.
        • Nadkarni V.M.
        • et al.
        COSCA (Core Outcome Set for Cardiac Arrest) in Adults: An Advisory Statement From the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation.
        Resuscitation. 2018; 127: 147-163https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.03.022
        • International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR)
        KSU and expert systematic reviewer team process document.
        2018 (Accessed August 11, 2020)
        • Holmberg M.J.
        • Geri G.
        • Wiberg S.
        • et al.
        Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for cardiac arrest: A systematic review.
        Resuscitation. 2018; 131: 91-100https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2018.07.029
        • International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR)
        ILCOR Task Force Systematic Reviews (TFSR) of interventions: step by step guide.
        2019 (Accessed May 11, 2020)
        • Djarv T.
        • Swain J.M.
        • Chang W.T.
        • et al.
        Early or First Aid Administration Versus Late or In-hospital Administration of Aspirin for Non-traumatic Adult Chest Pain: A Systematic Review.
        Cureus. 2020; 12: e6862https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.6862
        • Schünemann H.J.
        • Wiercioch W.
        • Brozek J.
        • et al.
        GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks for adoption, adaptation, and de novo development of trustworthy recommendations: GRADE-ADOLOPMENT.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2017; 81: 101-110https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.09.009
        • Berg K.
        • Soar J.
        • Andersen L.W.
        • et al.
        4: Advanced life support: 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Science and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.
        Circulation. 2020; 142: S92-S139https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000893
        • Berg K.M.
        • Soar J.
        • Andersen L.W.
        • et al.
        on behalf of the Adult Advanced Life Support Collaborators. Adult advanced life support: International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.
        Resuscitation. 2020; 156: A79-A118
      11. International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). ILCOR task force ADOLOPMENT of existing publication: step by step guide. https://www.ilcor.org/data/Task_Force_Adolopment_Instructions_v_2_2Nov2019SACapproved.docx. Accessed August 11, 2020.

        • Methley A.M.
        • Campbell S.
        • Chew-Graham C.
        • McNally R.
        • Cheraghi-Sohi S.
        PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: a comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews.
        BMC Health Serv Res. 2014; 14: 579https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0579-0
        • International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR)
        PICOST template.
        2019 (Accessed August 11, 2020)
        • Iorio A.
        • Spencer F.A.
        • Falavigna M.
        • et al.
        Use of GRADE for assessment of evidence about prognosis: rating confidence in estimates of event rates in broad categories of patients.
        BMJ. 2015; 350: h870https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h870
        • Schünemann H.J.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Brozek J.
        • et al.
        Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies.
        BMJ. 2008; 336: 1106-1110https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39500.677199.AE
        • Moons K.G.M.
        • Wolff R.F.
        • Riley R.D.
        • et al.
        PROBAST: A Tool to Assess Risk of Bias and Applicability of Prediction Model Studies: Explanation and Elaboration.
        Ann Intern Med. 2019; 170: W1-W33https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-1377
        • Santesso N.
        • Glenton C.
        • Dahm P.
        • et al.
        GRADE guidelines 26: informative statements to communicate the findings of systematic reviews of interventions.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2020; 119: 126-135https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.10.014
        • Sterne J.A.C.
        • Savović J.
        • Page M.J.
        • et al.
        RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.
        BMJ. 2019; 366: l4898https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4898
        • Balshem H.
        • Helfand M.
        • Schünemann H.J.
        • et al.
        GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 401-406https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015
        • Schünemann H.J.
        • Cuello C.
        • Akl E.A.
        • et al.
        GRADE guidelines: 18. How ROBINS-I and other tools to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies should be used to rate the certainty of a body of evidence.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2019; 111: 105-114https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.01.012
        • Sterne J.A.
        • Hernán M.A.
        • Reeves B.C.
        • et al.
        ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.
        BMJ. 2016; 355: i4919https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4919
      12. Evidence Prime Inc. GDT Guideline Development Tool. https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/help/user_guide/index.html. Accessed August 11, 2020.

        • Hultcrantz M.
        • Rind D.
        • Akl E.A.
        • et al.
        The GRADE Working Group clarifies the construct of certainty of evidence.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2017; 87: 4-13https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.05.006
        • Zhang Y.
        • Alonso-Coello P.
        • Guyatt G.H.
        • et al.
        GRADE Guidelines: 19. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-Risk of bias and indirectness.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2019; 111: 94-104https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.01.013
        • Andrews J.
        • Guyatt G.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • et al.
        GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2013; 66: 719-725https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.03.013
        • Alexander P.E.
        • Brito J.P.
        • Neumann I.
        • et al.
        World Health Organization strong recommendations based on low-quality evidence (study quality) are frequent and often inconsistent with GRADE guidance.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2016; 72: 98-106https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.10.011
        • Neumann I.
        • Schünemann H.J.
        Guideline groups should make recommendations even if the evidence is considered insufficient.
        CMAJ. 2020; 192: E23-E24https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.190144
        • Guyatt G.H.
        • Alonso-Coello P.
        • Schünemann H.J.
        • et al.
        Guideline panels should seldom make good practice statements: guidance from the GRADE Working Group.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2016; 80: 3-7https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.07.006
        • Arksey H.
        • O’Malley L.
        Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework.
        Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005; 8: 19-32
        • Colquhoun H.L.
        • Levac D.
        • O’Brien K.K.
        • et al.
        Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2014; 67: 1291-1294https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.013
      13. International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). ILCOR Task Force Scoping Reviews (TFScR): step by step guide. https://www.ilcor.org/data/Task_Force_Scoping_Reviews_Guidance_v_1.0_27_Sept_2019SACApproved.docx. Accessed August 11, 2020.

        • International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation
        Scoping review template v1.0 SAC approved.
        2019 (https://www.ilcor.org/data/Scoping_Review_Template_SAC_Approved_17Nov2019.docx. Accessed August 11, 2020)
        • Considine J.
        • Gazmuri R.J.
        • Perkins G.D.
        • et al.
        Chest compression components (rate, depth, chest wall recoil and leaning): A scoping review.
        Resuscitation. 2020; 146: 188-202https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2019.08.042
        • Billi J.E.
        • Shuster M.
        • Bossaert L.
        • et al.
        Part 4: conflict of interest management before, during, and after the 2010 International Consensus Conference on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.
        Circulation. 2010; 122: S291-S297https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.110.970962
        • Shuster M.
        • Billi J.E.
        • Bossaert L.
        • et al.
        International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation; American Heart Association. Part 4: conflict of interest management before, during, and after the 2010 International Consensus Conference on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations.
        Resuscitatio. 2010; 81 (PMID: 20956036): e41-e47https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.08.024
        • Søreide E.
        • Morrison L.
        • Hillman K.
        • et al.
        The formula for survival in resuscitation.
        Resuscitation. 2013; 84: 1487-1493https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2013.07.020