How are you taking part in this consultation?

You will not be able to change how you comment later.

You must be signed in to answer questions

    The content on this page is not current guidance and is only for the purposes of the consultation process.

    Appendix A: Methods and literature search strategy

    Methods and literature search strategy

    NICE has identified studies and reviews relevant to transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement for tricuspid regurgitation from the medical literature.

    Search strategy design and peer review

    This search report is informed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses literature search extension (PRISMA-S).

    A NICE information specialist ran the literature searches on 25/04/2025. See the search strategy history for the full search strategy for each database. Relevant published studies identified during consultation or resolution that are published after this date may also be considered for inclusion.

    The principal search strategy was developed in MEDLINE ALL (Ovid interface). It was adapted for use in each of the databases listed in table 4a, taking into account the database's size, search functionality and subject coverage. The MEDLINE ALL strategy was quality assured by a NICE senior information specialist. All translated search strategies were peer reviewed to ensure their accuracy. The quality assurance and peer review procedures were adapted from the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) 2015 evidence-based checklist.

    Review management

    The search results were managed in EPPI‑Reviewer version 5 (EPPI‑R5). Duplicates were removed in EPPI‑R5 using a 2‑step process. First, automated deduplication was done using a high-value algorithm. Second, manual deduplication was used to assess low-probability matches. All decisions about inclusion, exclusion and deduplication were recorded and stored.

    Limits and restrictions

    The search was not limited by date or language.

    The CENTRAL database search removed trial registry records and conference material. The Embase search excluded conference material.

    The limit to remove animal studies in the searches is standard NICE practice, which has been adapted from Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C (1994) Systematic Reviews: Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ 309(6964): 1286.