OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to elucidate the methodological practices and reporting standards associated with sequence analysis (SA) for the identification of clinical pathways in real-world scenarios, using routinely collected data.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a methodological systematic review, searching five medical and health databases: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE and Web of Science. The search encompassed articles from the inception of these databases up to February 28, 2023. The search strategy comprised two distinctive sets of search terms, specifically focused on sequence analysis and clinical pathways.
RESULTS: 19 studies met the eligibility criteria for this systematic review. Nearly 60% of the included studies were published in or after 2021, with a significant proportion originating from Canada (n = 7) and France (n = 5). 90% of the studies adhered to the fundamental SA steps. The optimal matching (OM) method emerged as the most frequently employed dissimilarity measure (63%), while agglomerative hierarchical clustering using Ward's linkage was the preferred clustering algorithm (53%). However, it is imperative to underline that a majority of the studies inadequately reported key methodological decisions pertaining to SA.
CONCLUSION: This review underscores the necessity for enhanced transparency in reporting both data management procedures and key methodological choices within SA processes. The development of reporting guidelines and a robust appraisal tool tailored to assess the quality of SA would be invaluable for researchers in this field.
