A multidisciplinary systematic literature review on frailty: Overview of the methodology used by the Canadian Initiative on Frailty and Aging

• Main Authors: Bergman Howard, Wolfson Christina, Karunananthan Sathya, Béland François, Hogan David B
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2009-10-01
• Series: BMC Medical Research Methodology
• Online Access: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/9/68

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Over the past two decades, there has been a substantial growth in the body of literature on frailty in older persons. However, there is no consensus on its definition or the criteria used to identify frailty. In response to this lack of consensus, the Canadian Initiative on Frailty and Aging carried out a set of systematic reviews of the literature in ten areas of frailty research: biological basis; social basis; prevalence; risk factors; impact; identification; prevention and management; environment and technology; health services; health and social policy. This paper describes the methodology that was developed for the systematic reviews.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A Central Coordination Group (CCG) was responsible for developing the methodology. This involved the development of search strategies and keywords, article selection processes, quality assessment tools, and guidelines for the synthesis of results. Each review was conducted by two experts in the content area, with the assistance of methodologists and statisticians from the CCG.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Conducting a series of systematic literature reviews involving a range of disciplines on a concept that does not have a universally accepted definition posed several conceptual and methodological challenges. The most important conceptual challenge was determining what would qualify as literature on frailty. The methodological challenges arose from our goal of structuring a consistent methodology for reviewing literature from diverse fields of research. At the outset, certain methodological guidelines were deemed essential to ensure the validity of all the reviews. Nevertheless, it was equally important to permit flexibility in the application of the proposed methodology to capture the essence of frailty research within the given fields.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The results of these reviews allowed us to establish the status of current knowledge on frailty and promote collaboration between disciplines. Conducting systematic literature reviews in health science that involve multiple disciplines is a mechanism to facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration and a more integrated understanding of health. This initiative highlighted the need for further methodological development in the performance of multidisciplinary systematic reviews.</p>