PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY Researchers are expected to actively involve stakeholders (including patients, the public, health professionals, and others) in their research. Although researchers increasingly recognise that this is good practice, there is limited practical guidance about how to involve stakeholders. Systematic reviews are a research method in which international literature is brought together, using carefully designed and rigorous methods to answer a specified question about healthcare. We want to investigate how researchers have involved stakeholders in systematic reviews, and how involvement has potentially affected the quality and impact of reviews. We plan to bring this information together by searching and reviewing the literature for reports of stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews. This paper describes in detail the methods that we plan to use to do this. After carrying out comprehensive searches for literature, we will: 1. Provide an overview of identified reports, describing key information such as types of stakeholders involved, and how. 2. Pick out reports of involvement which include detailed descriptions of how researchers involved people in a systematic review and summarise the methods they used. We will consider who was involved, how people were recruited, and how the involvement was organised and managed. 3. Bring together any reports which have explored the effect, or impact, of involving stakeholders in a systematic review. We will assess the quality of these reports, and summarise their findings. Once completed, our review will be used to produce training resources aimed at helping researchers to improve ways of involving stakeholders in systematic reviews. ABSTRACT Background There is an expectation for stakeholders (including patients, the public, health professionals, and others) to be involved in research. Researchers are increasingly recognising that it is good practice to involve stakeholders in systematic reviews. There is currently a lack of evidence about (A) how to do this and (B) the effects, or impact, of such involvement. We aim to create a map of the evidence relating to stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews, and use this evidence to address the two points above. Methods We will complete a mixed-method synthesis of the evidence, first completing a scoping review to create a broad map of evidence relating to stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews, and secondly completing two contingent syntheses. We will use a stepwise approach to searching; the initial step will include comprehensive searches of electronic databases, including CENTRAL, AMED, Embase, Medline, Cinahl and other databases, supplemented with pre-defined hand-searching and contacting authors. Two reviewers will undertake each review task (i.e., screening, data extraction) using standard systematic review processes. For the scoping review, we will include any paper, regardless of publication status or study design, which investigates, reports or discusses involvement in a systematic review. Included papers will be summarised within structured tables. Criteria for judging the focus and comprehensiveness of the description of methods of involvement will be applied, informing which papers are included within the two contingent syntheses. Synthesis A will detail the methods that have been used to involve stakeholders in systematic reviews. Papers from the scoping review that are judged to provide an adequate description of methods or approaches will be included. Details of the methods of involvement will be extracted from included papers using pre-defined headings, presented in tables and described narratively. Synthesis B will include studies that explore the effect of stakeholder involvement on the quality, relevance or impact of a systematic review, as identified from the scoping review. Study quality will be appraised, data extracted and synthesised within tables. Discussion This review should help researchers select, improve and evaluate methods of involving stakeholders in systematic reviews. Review findings will contribute to Cochrane training resources.

中文翻译：

---

利益相关者参与系统的审查：对方法，结果和效果进行系统审查的协议。

普通英语摘要预计研究人员将使利益相关者（包括患者，公众，卫生专业人员和其他人员）积极参与其研究。尽管研究人员越来越认识到这是一种好的做法，但是关于如何让利益相关者参与的实践指导却很少。系统评价是一种将国际文献汇集在一起​​的研究方法，它使用精心设计的严格方法来回答有关医疗保健的特定问题。我们想调查研究人员如何使利益相关者参与系统评价，以及参与如何可能影响评价的质量和影响。我们计划通过搜索和审查有关利益相关者参与系统审查的报告的文献来将这些信息整合在一起。本文详细介绍了我们计划用于执行此操作的方法。在对文献进行全面搜索之后，我们将：1.提供已识别报告的概述，描述关键信息，例如所涉利益相关方的类型以及方式。2.挑选有关参与的报告，其中包括对研究人员如何使人们参与系统评估的详细说明，并总结他们使用的方法。我们将考虑谁参与其中，如何招募人员以及如何组织和管理参与。3.将探讨利益相关者参与系统审查的影响的所有报告汇总在一起。我们将评估这些报告的质量，并总结其发现。完成后，我们的评论将用于产生培训资源，旨在帮助研究人员改善使利益相关者参与系统评论的方式。摘要背景期望利益相关者（包括患者，公众，卫生专业人员和其他人员）参与研究。研究人员越来越认识到，让利益相关者参与系统评价是一种好习惯。当前缺乏关于（A）如何做到这一点和（B）这种参与的影响或影响的证据。我们旨在创建与利益相关者参与系统审查有关的证据图，并使用该证据来解决以上两点。方法我们将完成证据的混合方法综合，首先完成范围界定审查，以创建与利益相关者参与系统审查有关的广泛证据，其次，完成两个或有综合。我们将使用逐步的方法进行搜索；第一步将包括全面搜索电子数据库，包括CENTRAL，AMED，Embase，Medline，Cinahl和其他数据库，并辅以预先定义的人工搜索和联系作者。两名审稿人将使用标准的系统审稿流程来承担每个审稿任务（即筛选，数据提取）。对于范围审查，我们将包括任何论文，无论其发表状态或研究设计如何，都将调查，报告或讨论参与系统审查的内容。包含的论文将在结构化表格中进行汇总。将应用判断参与方法描述的重点和全面性的标准，并告知哪些论文包含在两个或有综合中。综合A将详细介绍使利益相关者参与系统审查的方法。范围界定审查中被认为可以对方法或方法进行充分描述的论文也将包括在内。参与方法的详细信息将使用预先定义的标题从附带的论文中提取，这些标题在表格中提供并以叙述方式进行描述。综合B将包括研究，这些研究探讨了利益相关方参与对范围审查的质量，相关性或影响的影响，如范围界定审查所确定。将在表中评估研究质量，提取数据并进行综合。讨论本综述应帮助研究人员选择，改进和评估使利益相关者参与系统评价的方法。审查结果将有助于Cochrane培训资源。