Why conducting and updating systematic reviews are resource intensive: a phenomenological qualitative study protocol Fenomenologic

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews are labour intensive and time consuming. Previous research describes the large variation of resources needed to conduct a good systematic review and the influence of various factors on the quality and time frame to complete the review process, but an in-depth analysis of the perceived areas where a gain in efficiency can be achieved, has not been conducted.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to understand why some steps in the systematic review production and update processes are more resource intensive than others.

METHODS: In-depth, semi structured interviews will be conducted with experts who have conducted or supported systematic reviews on health-related topics including clinical, health services, public health and health policy research.

DISCUSSION: As a result of this study we will be able to better understand why some steps of the systematic review process for health-related topics are experienced as resource intensive, as well as factors influencing that intensity.