Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Systematic Reviews
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
3 likes•2,165 views
This document distinguishes systematic reviews from standard literature reviews and introduces systematic reviews and meta-analyses. It provides definitions, goals, components, authorship requirements, time commitments, and value of systematic reviews compared to standard literature reviews. The document also reviews how to locate reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses in PubMed and introduces the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
Report
Share
Report
Share
Recommended
Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Observational Studies and Trials
The document outlines different types of observational studies and clinical trials used in evidence-based research, including case reports, case series, case-control studies, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials. It discusses the defining characteristics and relative strengths and weaknesses of each study type. Finally, it introduces PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov as resources for locating published observational studies and clinical trials.
Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Guidelines
This document discusses evidence-based guidelines and summarizes different types of medical evidence publications from highest to lowest quality. It then presents a clinical scenario about prostate cancer screening and demonstrates how to formulate a question using PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome). Resources for finding clinical guidelines like PubMed and the National Guidelines Clearinghouse are described. The presentation raises questions about whether clinical information tools should be considered evidence-based medical resources and how to evaluate them.
Systematic Reviews in Social Work
This document discusses systematic reviews and summarizes their key aspects in 3 sentences: Systematic reviews aim to identify, select, appraise and synthesize all relevant studies on a clearly formulated question using explicit and reproducible methods. They involve developing a comprehensive search strategy, selecting sources, managing references, critically appraising studies, and synthesizing findings through meta-analysis or meta-synthesis. Record keeping, peer review, and use of software can help ensure systematic reviews are objective, reproducible, and follow best practices.
Systematic review
A systematic review is a structured review that pools the results of multiple studies on a topic using meta-analysis. It aims to summarize evidence from studies addressing a specific clinical question in a rigorous, unbiased manner to explain differences among studies on the same question. Systematic reviews are considered the highest level of evidence and are needed because individual studies may have biases or low statistical power to detect effects.
Search for evidence
The document provides guidance on selecting evidence-based medicine tools and resources for clinicians. It recommends keeping resources simple, focusing on those that are free or accessible at the point of care. Primary research sites like PubMed and specialized databases like Cochrane and National Guideline Clearinghouse are suggested as starting places. When formulating questions, a systematic search process including guidelines, reviews and primary studies is outlined.
Systematic Review: Beginner's Guide
1) A systematic review follows a strict methodology to identify and analyze relevant research on a focused question.
2) The process involves developing a protocol, searching multiple databases, screening studies, assessing bias, and synthesizing data.
3) Reporting guidelines like PRISMA ensure transparency and consistency in reporting systematic reviews.
Updated - What makes systematic review systematic - Anna Sidorchuk
This document provides an outline and overview of a speech on what makes a systematic review systematic from an epidemiological perspective. It discusses key aspects of systematic reviews including how they differ from non-systematic reviews, guidelines for conducting systematic reviews, inclusion of randomized and observational data, assessing risk of bias, and summarizing results. The speaker aims to explain the value added by systematic reviews over traditional literature reviews in providing objective and replicable summaries of evidence on a topic.
How to conduct abstract screening for systematic review – Pubrica
Abstract screening is a necessary step in conducting a thorough and efficient systematic assessment.
• Before screening begins
• During abstract screening
• After screening ends
Continue Reading: https://bit.ly/2UmT1HQ
For our services: https://pubrica.com/services/research-services/systematic-review/
Why Pubrica:
When you order our services, We promise you the following – Plagiarism free | always on Time | 24*7 customer support | Written to international Standard | Unlimited Revisions support | Medical writing Expert | Publication Support | Biostatistical experts | High-quality Subject Matter Experts.
Contact us:
Web: https://pubrica.com/
Blog: https://pubrica.com/academy/
Email: sales@pubrica.com
WhatsApp : +91 9884350006
United Kingdom: +44-1618186353
Recommended
Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Observational Studies and Trials
The document outlines different types of observational studies and clinical trials used in evidence-based research, including case reports, case series, case-control studies, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials. It discusses the defining characteristics and relative strengths and weaknesses of each study type. Finally, it introduces PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov as resources for locating published observational studies and clinical trials.
Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Guidelines
This document discusses evidence-based guidelines and summarizes different types of medical evidence publications from highest to lowest quality. It then presents a clinical scenario about prostate cancer screening and demonstrates how to formulate a question using PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome). Resources for finding clinical guidelines like PubMed and the National Guidelines Clearinghouse are described. The presentation raises questions about whether clinical information tools should be considered evidence-based medical resources and how to evaluate them.
Systematic Reviews in Social Work
This document discusses systematic reviews and summarizes their key aspects in 3 sentences: Systematic reviews aim to identify, select, appraise and synthesize all relevant studies on a clearly formulated question using explicit and reproducible methods. They involve developing a comprehensive search strategy, selecting sources, managing references, critically appraising studies, and synthesizing findings through meta-analysis or meta-synthesis. Record keeping, peer review, and use of software can help ensure systematic reviews are objective, reproducible, and follow best practices.
Systematic review
A systematic review is a structured review that pools the results of multiple studies on a topic using meta-analysis. It aims to summarize evidence from studies addressing a specific clinical question in a rigorous, unbiased manner to explain differences among studies on the same question. Systematic reviews are considered the highest level of evidence and are needed because individual studies may have biases or low statistical power to detect effects.
Search for evidence
The document provides guidance on selecting evidence-based medicine tools and resources for clinicians. It recommends keeping resources simple, focusing on those that are free or accessible at the point of care. Primary research sites like PubMed and specialized databases like Cochrane and National Guideline Clearinghouse are suggested as starting places. When formulating questions, a systematic search process including guidelines, reviews and primary studies is outlined.
Systematic Review: Beginner's Guide
1) A systematic review follows a strict methodology to identify and analyze relevant research on a focused question.
2) The process involves developing a protocol, searching multiple databases, screening studies, assessing bias, and synthesizing data.
3) Reporting guidelines like PRISMA ensure transparency and consistency in reporting systematic reviews.
Updated - What makes systematic review systematic - Anna Sidorchuk
This document provides an outline and overview of a speech on what makes a systematic review systematic from an epidemiological perspective. It discusses key aspects of systematic reviews including how they differ from non-systematic reviews, guidelines for conducting systematic reviews, inclusion of randomized and observational data, assessing risk of bias, and summarizing results. The speaker aims to explain the value added by systematic reviews over traditional literature reviews in providing objective and replicable summaries of evidence on a topic.
How to conduct abstract screening for systematic review – Pubrica
Abstract screening is a necessary step in conducting a thorough and efficient systematic assessment.
• Before screening begins
• During abstract screening
• After screening ends
Continue Reading: https://bit.ly/2UmT1HQ
For our services: https://pubrica.com/services/research-services/systematic-review/
Why Pubrica:
When you order our services, We promise you the following – Plagiarism free | always on Time | 24*7 customer support | Written to international Standard | Unlimited Revisions support | Medical writing Expert | Publication Support | Biostatistical experts | High-quality Subject Matter Experts.
Contact us:
Web: https://pubrica.com/
Blog: https://pubrica.com/academy/
Email: sales@pubrica.com
WhatsApp : +91 9884350006
United Kingdom: +44-1618186353
Critical appraisal
Critical appraisal is the process of carefully examining research to judge its validity, relevance, and applicability. It is important to ensure research findings are valid and applicable to one's own population before incorporating them into clinical practice. While research is peer-reviewed, critical appraisal is still needed to avoid misinterpreting results. When critically appraising research, one should examine aspects like the research question, methodology, results, discussion and conclusions to determine the overall quality and implications. Checklists exist to standardize the critical appraisal of different study designs.
When do systematic reviews become unsystematic? Julie Williams
This document discusses systematic reviews and provides guidance on conducting comprehensive literature searches for systematic reviews. It notes that adherence to an explicit protocol is what makes a review systematic, while lack of protocol adherence makes a review unsystematic. The document also discusses challenges with systematic reviews, such as variation in conclusions between reviews on the same topic. It provides examples of literature search strategies and reporting from published systematic reviews. Overall, the document outlines best practices for conducting thorough literature searches and reporting search methods in systematic reviews.
Systematic Reviews Overview
Systematic reviews provide a rigorous summary of the evidence on a topic by collecting and analyzing multiple studies. They help various groups stay up-to-date on health issues and make informed decisions. The process of conducting a systematic review is complex, taking at least 12 months and following standards to minimize bias. It involves defining the question, searching extensively for studies, selecting relevant studies, extracting and analyzing data, and publishing results. Librarian involvement can help ensure a comprehensive search strategy.
Basics of Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Part 1
This document discusses the basics of conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis, including choosing a novel and interesting topic where evidence is still unclear, writing a protocol according to PRISMA-P guidelines and registering the review, searching various databases and other sources for literature, developing a search strategy and flowchart for study selection, and ensuring an exhaustive literature review by obtaining full texts and contacting authors and experts for unpublished work or additional data.
Systematic reviews at the peak of research designs
This lecture explains why systematic reviews were catapulted to the peak of the study designs. Its advantages and limitations are discussed. The measures to overcome the limitations are also discussed.
Reporting the Review
This document outlines the structure and key elements that should be included in a systematic review report. It recommends including an abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion and conclusion sections. The methods section should describe the literature search strategy, eligibility criteria, data extraction and quality assessment processes. Results should be presented according to the review questions. The discussion should synthesize the findings, discuss limitations and draw conclusions. Guidelines like PRISMA can help improve reporting quality.
Levels of evidence, systematic review and guidelines
1) Evidence-based medicine requires integrating the best research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values and circumstances.
2) Levels of evidence are used to rank types of medical studies, with systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials ranked highest.
3) Systematic reviews use explicit and reproducible methods to identify, select, and critically appraise relevant research to answer a specific clinical question.
Systematic Reviews: the process, quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods ...
This document discusses systematic reviews and their process. It defines systematic reviews as attempts to identify, appraise, and synthesize all empirical evidence that meets pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a given research question. It notes there are quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods reviews. The document outlines the steps in conducting a systematic review, including developing a protocol and research question, locating studies, assessing studies, extracting and analyzing data, and presenting results.
Cochrane Library Training
This document provides an overview of a workshop on using the Cochrane Library to train health librarians. The workshop covers introductions, an overview of Cochrane and systematic reviews, a demonstration of searching the Cochrane Library database, and small group work. Participants learn about finding and critically appraising systematic reviews to help inform evidence-based healthcare practices and decisions.
Doing quantitative research in social sciences
This document provides an overview of quantitative research methods in the social sciences. It discusses:
1. The key steps in quantitative research including selecting a problem, reviewing literature, formulating research questions and hypotheses, identifying and defining variables, designing instruments, collecting and analyzing data.
2. Common quantitative research designs like surveys, correlational research, experimental and quasi-experimental methods.
3. Important quantitative research concepts like populations, samples, levels of measurement, validity and reliability, descriptive and inferential statistics, and hypothesis testing.
Expert searching - what are we missing? Sarah Hayman
The document discusses expert searching in systematic reviews. It covers analyzing sources like databases and terminology, developing search strategies, using filters, analyzing results, and searching grey literature. The key points are to collaborate with experts, research best practices, analyze your sources, terms, strategies and results, document your work, and consider tools like textual analysis and gold standards to improve searches. Thoroughness, transparency and adjusting searches based on analysis are emphasized.
Developing Search Methods for Systematic Review
Presentation at: Developing Search Methods for Systematic Review Workshop; September 19, 2015; Sina Trauma and Surgery Research Centre , Sina Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Included Topics: developing search protocols for systematic reviews, search strategies, search resources, search levels, search operators, management of search results, search and information management methods.
searching for evidence
This document discusses sources of evidence for evidence-based practice. It outlines traditional sources such as textbooks and colleagues as well as evidence-based practice sources. Primary sources include original peer-reviewed papers that can be searched through databases like PubMed. Secondary sources provide synthesized research through systematic reviews and guidelines. Examples given are evidence-based journals, The Cochrane Library, and TRIP Database. A structured approach to database searching is also outlined, including developing a focused question and using keywords, subject headings, and Boolean operators to efficiently search literature.
Introduction to systematic literature review
This document provides an introduction to systematic literature reviews. It defines what a systematic literature review is, differentiates it from traditional reviews, and outlines the key stages in conducting an SLR. A SLR uses a systematic and comprehensive approach to minimize bias by documenting an a priori protocol. The stages discussed are formulating the research question, carrying out searches, selecting studies, extracting data, assessing risk of bias, synthesizing evidence, and defining the protocol. History and rationale for using SLRs to summarize research evidence rigorously are also presented.
Systematic Reviews: the researcher's perspective and the research question. E...
The document discusses the perspectives of researchers conducting systematic reviews and the importance of developing a clear research question. It emphasizes that a well-constructed question using the PICO/PICo framework is fundamental to guiding the review process, including developing inclusion criteria and an effective search strategy. Researchers may have different levels of experience and understanding of systematic reviews, so librarians play an important role in helping them conceptualize the question and properly carry out the various review steps, such as developing a reproducible search strategy.
HEALTHCARE RESEARCH METHODS: the Research Question, the team and the study ap...
This document discusses study design approaches in healthcare research methods. It begins by explaining the importance of focusing the research question and defining specific study goals and objectives. It then describes primary, secondary, and tertiary research approaches. The main body of the document provides an overview of 8 common study designs: reviews/meta-analyses, correlational studies, case series, cross-sectional surveys, case control studies, cohort studies, experimental studies, and qualitative studies. It discusses the key characteristics of reviews and meta-analyses in more detail, including how they systematically analyze and summarize existing research to identify trends and draw conclusions.
Cohcrane Library
The Cochrane Library is a collection of six healthcare databases that contain different types of evidence including Cochrane Reviews (systematic reviews), clinical trials, methodology studies, health technology assessments, and economic evaluations to inform healthcare decision making. It allows users to browse or search across databases, read editorials and special collections, listen to podcasts, and access the Cochrane Journal Club.
systematic review : why & How
A well recognised form of research is called systematic reviews on specific point. Why do we need them and How they can be done?? this talk is trying to answer these questions in a simple way
Nursing: Searching at CSULB
This document provides an overview of library resources for nursing students at CSULB. It reviews how to identify scholarly and scientific literature, use evidence-based practice to guide searches, formulate questions using the PICO(T) format to identify key terms, search databases and limit results, and find additional help through the nursing research guide and librarians. The session aims to help students effectively search for and evaluate information to support their nursing education and practice.
Finding Information Framework
Finding Information Framework adapted from Boston University School of Medicine for JMU's Physician Assistant program
Systematic review
This document outlines the process for conducting a systematic review. It begins by defining a systematic review as a review of research on a clearly formulated question that uses explicit and reproducible methods. It notes systematic reviews aim to identify, appraise, and synthesize all high-quality research evidence relevant to that question. The document then discusses why systematic reviews are important for summarizing evidence, limiting bias, and avoiding errors. It provides examples of how systematic reviews can help establish evidence-based practices. Finally, it describes the typical steps involved in conducting a systematic review, from developing a question to interpreting results.
Evidence Based Dentistry Resources
The document discusses various resources for evidence-based dentistry, including textbooks, Cochrane handbooks, journal articles, databases, and guidelines. It provides details on the types of articles most useful for evidence-based practice, such as systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. Examples are given of evidence-based dentistry journals and databases like PubMed Health that summarize clinical effectiveness research.
More Related Content
What's hot
Critical appraisal
Critical appraisal is the process of carefully examining research to judge its validity, relevance, and applicability. It is important to ensure research findings are valid and applicable to one's own population before incorporating them into clinical practice. While research is peer-reviewed, critical appraisal is still needed to avoid misinterpreting results. When critically appraising research, one should examine aspects like the research question, methodology, results, discussion and conclusions to determine the overall quality and implications. Checklists exist to standardize the critical appraisal of different study designs.
When do systematic reviews become unsystematic? Julie Williams
This document discusses systematic reviews and provides guidance on conducting comprehensive literature searches for systematic reviews. It notes that adherence to an explicit protocol is what makes a review systematic, while lack of protocol adherence makes a review unsystematic. The document also discusses challenges with systematic reviews, such as variation in conclusions between reviews on the same topic. It provides examples of literature search strategies and reporting from published systematic reviews. Overall, the document outlines best practices for conducting thorough literature searches and reporting search methods in systematic reviews.
Systematic Reviews Overview
Systematic reviews provide a rigorous summary of the evidence on a topic by collecting and analyzing multiple studies. They help various groups stay up-to-date on health issues and make informed decisions. The process of conducting a systematic review is complex, taking at least 12 months and following standards to minimize bias. It involves defining the question, searching extensively for studies, selecting relevant studies, extracting and analyzing data, and publishing results. Librarian involvement can help ensure a comprehensive search strategy.
Basics of Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Part 1
This document discusses the basics of conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis, including choosing a novel and interesting topic where evidence is still unclear, writing a protocol according to PRISMA-P guidelines and registering the review, searching various databases and other sources for literature, developing a search strategy and flowchart for study selection, and ensuring an exhaustive literature review by obtaining full texts and contacting authors and experts for unpublished work or additional data.
Systematic reviews at the peak of research designs
This lecture explains why systematic reviews were catapulted to the peak of the study designs. Its advantages and limitations are discussed. The measures to overcome the limitations are also discussed.
Reporting the Review
This document outlines the structure and key elements that should be included in a systematic review report. It recommends including an abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion and conclusion sections. The methods section should describe the literature search strategy, eligibility criteria, data extraction and quality assessment processes. Results should be presented according to the review questions. The discussion should synthesize the findings, discuss limitations and draw conclusions. Guidelines like PRISMA can help improve reporting quality.
Levels of evidence, systematic review and guidelines
1) Evidence-based medicine requires integrating the best research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values and circumstances.
2) Levels of evidence are used to rank types of medical studies, with systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials ranked highest.
3) Systematic reviews use explicit and reproducible methods to identify, select, and critically appraise relevant research to answer a specific clinical question.
Systematic Reviews: the process, quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods ...
This document discusses systematic reviews and their process. It defines systematic reviews as attempts to identify, appraise, and synthesize all empirical evidence that meets pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a given research question. It notes there are quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods reviews. The document outlines the steps in conducting a systematic review, including developing a protocol and research question, locating studies, assessing studies, extracting and analyzing data, and presenting results.
Cochrane Library Training
This document provides an overview of a workshop on using the Cochrane Library to train health librarians. The workshop covers introductions, an overview of Cochrane and systematic reviews, a demonstration of searching the Cochrane Library database, and small group work. Participants learn about finding and critically appraising systematic reviews to help inform evidence-based healthcare practices and decisions.
Doing quantitative research in social sciences
This document provides an overview of quantitative research methods in the social sciences. It discusses:
1. The key steps in quantitative research including selecting a problem, reviewing literature, formulating research questions and hypotheses, identifying and defining variables, designing instruments, collecting and analyzing data.
2. Common quantitative research designs like surveys, correlational research, experimental and quasi-experimental methods.
3. Important quantitative research concepts like populations, samples, levels of measurement, validity and reliability, descriptive and inferential statistics, and hypothesis testing.
Expert searching - what are we missing? Sarah Hayman
The document discusses expert searching in systematic reviews. It covers analyzing sources like databases and terminology, developing search strategies, using filters, analyzing results, and searching grey literature. The key points are to collaborate with experts, research best practices, analyze your sources, terms, strategies and results, document your work, and consider tools like textual analysis and gold standards to improve searches. Thoroughness, transparency and adjusting searches based on analysis are emphasized.
Developing Search Methods for Systematic Review
Presentation at: Developing Search Methods for Systematic Review Workshop; September 19, 2015; Sina Trauma and Surgery Research Centre , Sina Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Included Topics: developing search protocols for systematic reviews, search strategies, search resources, search levels, search operators, management of search results, search and information management methods.
searching for evidence
This document discusses sources of evidence for evidence-based practice. It outlines traditional sources such as textbooks and colleagues as well as evidence-based practice sources. Primary sources include original peer-reviewed papers that can be searched through databases like PubMed. Secondary sources provide synthesized research through systematic reviews and guidelines. Examples given are evidence-based journals, The Cochrane Library, and TRIP Database. A structured approach to database searching is also outlined, including developing a focused question and using keywords, subject headings, and Boolean operators to efficiently search literature.
Introduction to systematic literature review
This document provides an introduction to systematic literature reviews. It defines what a systematic literature review is, differentiates it from traditional reviews, and outlines the key stages in conducting an SLR. A SLR uses a systematic and comprehensive approach to minimize bias by documenting an a priori protocol. The stages discussed are formulating the research question, carrying out searches, selecting studies, extracting data, assessing risk of bias, synthesizing evidence, and defining the protocol. History and rationale for using SLRs to summarize research evidence rigorously are also presented.
Systematic Reviews: the researcher's perspective and the research question. E...
The document discusses the perspectives of researchers conducting systematic reviews and the importance of developing a clear research question. It emphasizes that a well-constructed question using the PICO/PICo framework is fundamental to guiding the review process, including developing inclusion criteria and an effective search strategy. Researchers may have different levels of experience and understanding of systematic reviews, so librarians play an important role in helping them conceptualize the question and properly carry out the various review steps, such as developing a reproducible search strategy.
HEALTHCARE RESEARCH METHODS: the Research Question, the team and the study ap...
This document discusses study design approaches in healthcare research methods. It begins by explaining the importance of focusing the research question and defining specific study goals and objectives. It then describes primary, secondary, and tertiary research approaches. The main body of the document provides an overview of 8 common study designs: reviews/meta-analyses, correlational studies, case series, cross-sectional surveys, case control studies, cohort studies, experimental studies, and qualitative studies. It discusses the key characteristics of reviews and meta-analyses in more detail, including how they systematically analyze and summarize existing research to identify trends and draw conclusions.
Cohcrane Library
The Cochrane Library is a collection of six healthcare databases that contain different types of evidence including Cochrane Reviews (systematic reviews), clinical trials, methodology studies, health technology assessments, and economic evaluations to inform healthcare decision making. It allows users to browse or search across databases, read editorials and special collections, listen to podcasts, and access the Cochrane Journal Club.
systematic review : why & How
A well recognised form of research is called systematic reviews on specific point. Why do we need them and How they can be done?? this talk is trying to answer these questions in a simple way
Nursing: Searching at CSULB
This document provides an overview of library resources for nursing students at CSULB. It reviews how to identify scholarly and scientific literature, use evidence-based practice to guide searches, formulate questions using the PICO(T) format to identify key terms, search databases and limit results, and find additional help through the nursing research guide and librarians. The session aims to help students effectively search for and evaluate information to support their nursing education and practice.
Finding Information Framework
Finding Information Framework adapted from Boston University School of Medicine for JMU's Physician Assistant program
What's hot (20)
When do systematic reviews become unsystematic? Julie Williams
When do systematic reviews become unsystematic? Julie Williams
Basics of Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Part 1
Basics of Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Part 1
Systematic reviews at the peak of research designs
Systematic reviews at the peak of research designs
Levels of evidence, systematic review and guidelines
Levels of evidence, systematic review and guidelines
Systematic Reviews: the process, quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods ...
Systematic Reviews: the process, quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods ...
Expert searching - what are we missing? Sarah Hayman
Expert searching - what are we missing? Sarah Hayman
Systematic Reviews: the researcher's perspective and the research question. E...
Systematic Reviews: the researcher's perspective and the research question. E...
HEALTHCARE RESEARCH METHODS: the Research Question, the team and the study ap...
HEALTHCARE RESEARCH METHODS: the Research Question, the team and the study ap...
Viewers also liked
Systematic review
This document outlines the process for conducting a systematic review. It begins by defining a systematic review as a review of research on a clearly formulated question that uses explicit and reproducible methods. It notes systematic reviews aim to identify, appraise, and synthesize all high-quality research evidence relevant to that question. The document then discusses why systematic reviews are important for summarizing evidence, limiting bias, and avoiding errors. It provides examples of how systematic reviews can help establish evidence-based practices. Finally, it describes the typical steps involved in conducting a systematic review, from developing a question to interpreting results.
Evidence Based Dentistry Resources
The document discusses various resources for evidence-based dentistry, including textbooks, Cochrane handbooks, journal articles, databases, and guidelines. It provides details on the types of articles most useful for evidence-based practice, such as systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. Examples are given of evidence-based dentistry journals and databases like PubMed Health that summarize clinical effectiveness research.
Systematic Reviews in the Health Sciences
This document provides an overview of systematic reviews, including what they are, why they are important in health sciences research, and the steps involved in conducting one. It defines a systematic review as a comprehensive study that collects and analyzes data from multiple research studies to answer a specific question. It notes that systematic reviews use explicit and rigorous methods to minimize bias and provide reliable conclusions. The key steps outlined include developing a protocol and research question, conducting comprehensive searches, selecting and assessing studies, extracting and synthesizing data, and disseminating findings.
Conducting Large Systematic Reviews for Meta-Analysis and Mixed Treatment Com...
Conducting Large Systematic Reviews for Meta-Analysis and Mixed Treatment Com...NOVEL Health Strategies
Conducting Large Systematic Reviews for Meta-Analysis and Mixed Treatment Comparison
Webinar by NOVEL Health StrategiesEvidence Based Dentistry
Este documento presenta la información sobre un curso de Odontología Basada en Evidencias. El curso cubre los principios de la odontología basada en evidencias, cómo formular preguntas PICO, realizar búsquedas de literatura, evaluar estudios epidemiológicos y valorar la evidencia. Los estudiantes aprenderán habilidades cognitivas como buscar e identificar tipos de estudios, y habilidades interpersonales como el trabajo en equipo. La evaluación de los estudiantes incluye varias asignaciones y exámenes.
Evidence-based Dentistry
This document discusses evidence-based dentistry and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in orthodontics. It defines evidence-based dentistry as integrating systematic assessments of scientific evidence with clinical expertise and patient preferences. RCTs are described as the gold standard for testing hypotheses as they minimize bias through randomization and blinding. However, RCTs can be challenging to conduct in orthodontics due to long treatment times and variability between patients. Recommendations for improving RCT quality include clearly defining the research question, proper randomization, sufficient sample sizes, and using valid and reliable methods.
6 sr and meta analysis-ayurved
1. The document outlines the process for conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, including defining the review question, searching for studies, selecting studies, extracting and analyzing data, and presenting results.
2. Key steps in a systematic review include developing an explicit methodology, conducting a comprehensive search, assessing risks of bias, and synthesizing evidence from included studies. Meta-analysis uses statistical methods to pool data from multiple studies.
3. Conducting high-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses can help resolve conflicts in evidence, establish best practices, and identify areas where additional research is needed.
Evidence based dentistry
This document discusses evidence-based periodontology. It begins by defining evidence-based medicine and dentistry, which involves integrating the best research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values and needs. The document outlines the goals and basic phases of evidence-based dentistry, including asking questions, searching for evidence, reviewing evidence, and applying it clinically. It discusses how to formulate search strategies and find the best evidence sources. Evidence-based periodontology aims to efficiently apply the best research to patient care. It concludes that clinicians must continually update their knowledge based on new research evidence and follow a systematic approach to consider evidence and apply it to clinical practice.
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
A systematic review is a rigorous analysis of published research on a focused question that collects and summarizes the evidence. It contrasts with an overview, which may include non-research articles and be influenced by other evidence. Meta-analysis uses statistical methods to combine results from multiple studies. To ensure validity, meta-analyses must have a well-defined methodology, including comprehensive searches and duplicate screening and data extraction to reduce bias. Important factors include assessing whether all relevant studies were found and the sources searched, as well as controlling for biases such as from selective data extraction or funding influences.
Systematic review and meta analaysis course - part 1
This presentation is the first part from Ahmed Negida's course titled: Systematic review and Meta-analysis.
Introduction to meta analysis
An introduction on how to go about a meta-analysis. Primarily designed for people with non statistical background. Heavily borrows from Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
Meta analysis
This document provides an overview of how to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis. It describes the key steps: (1) asking a focused clinical question using PICO, (2) acquiring relevant studies through database searches, (3) appraising the quality of included studies, (4) analyzing the data using statistical methods to obtain an overall treatment effect size, and (5) reporting results typically in a forest plot. Meta-analyses provide increased statistical power over individual studies but are not without limitations such as potential bias that must be considered when interpreting results.
Systematic review and meta analaysis course - part 2
This presentation is the second part from Ahmed Negida's course titled: Systematic review and Meta-analysis.
Meta analysis: Made Easy with Example from RevMan
This document provides an overview of meta-analysis, including:
1) Meta-analysis allows researchers to quantitatively combine the results of multiple studies on a topic to arrive at overall conclusions about the body of research.
2) The key steps of conducting a meta-analysis include developing a research protocol, performing a comprehensive literature search, selecting studies, assessing study quality, extracting data, analyzing data, and addressing heterogeneity and publication bias.
3) Funnel plots and statistical tests can be used to examine potential biases like publication bias in a meta-analysis. Addressing these biases helps ensure the meta-analysis provides an accurate summary of the evidence.
Introduction to Systematic Reviews
This workshop is meant to be an introduction to the systematic review process. Further information about systematic reviews was available through a research guide. http://libguides.ucalgary.ca/content.php?pid=593664
How to write a biomedical research paper
This was the presentation of (How to write a biomedical research day workshop) given by Ahmed Negida as a part from MRGE continuous research activities in Egypt.
The course was joined by 45 medical students and seniors from different Egyptian Universities and it was more than 6 hours of exciting learning activities.
Major Learning Objectives were:
1- Structure of biomedical Research Paper
2- How to Write a conference Abstract
3- Scientific Writing Rules
4- Research Protocol
5- Referencing Using Mendeley software
6- Scientific Publication
Systematic review ppt
A systematic review is a comprehensive literature review designed to answer a specific clinical question using a pre-defined protocol. It requires at least 12 months to conduct due to extensive searches of published and unpublished studies, validity assessments of included studies, data collection, analysis, and keeping the review up-to-date. In contrast, a traditional literature review does not follow a pre-specified protocol or aim to be comprehensive. Systematic reviews also publish detailed search strategies to allow replication and apply statistical methods like meta-analysis to synthesized data from included studies.
Evidence Based Medicine Intro
This document provides an overview of an evidence-based medicine (EBM) curriculum consisting of 3 modules: 1) Introduction to EBM, 2) Applying EBM to diagnosis, and 3) Applying EBM to treatment. It was prepared by faculty at Emory University School of Medicine and discusses the history and importance of EBM, how to formulate clinical questions and find the best evidence to answer them, and how to critically appraise and apply evidence to patient care.
Reflection Report - Dyson Case Study
The group faced two main issues during their assignment. First, there was a lack of critical analysis during research due to dividing work and not commenting on each other's parts. They proposed adopting a facilitative leadership model to promote critical thinking. Second, decision making was unsystematic with interruptions, due to being overly polite. They proposed using brainstorming to systematically involve members and allow for constructive conflict. Overall, the experience highlighted the importance of systematic critical thinking and debate within groups to achieve quality work.
Introduction to Evidence-Based Medicine
An RCT would provide the highest level of evidence to answer this question about the superiority of one therapy over another.
Viewers also liked (20)
Conducting Large Systematic Reviews for Meta-Analysis and Mixed Treatment Com...
Conducting Large Systematic Reviews for Meta-Analysis and Mixed Treatment Com...
Systematic review and meta analaysis course - part 1
Systematic review and meta analaysis course - part 1
Systematic review and meta analaysis course - part 2
Systematic review and meta analaysis course - part 2
Similar to Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Systematic Reviews
balini97.pdf
This document discusses types of medical publications and evidence-based medicine. It begins by listing common types of medical publications like original articles, review articles, case reports, and editorials. It then discusses systematic reviews and their advantages over traditional narrative reviews. Key steps in conducting a systematic review are described, including formulating focused questions, comprehensive literature searching, study quality assessment, data extraction, and synthesis. The importance of evidence-based medicine which integrates the best research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values is highlighted. Finally, different types of medical information resources like primary, secondary, and tertiary sources are listed.
Week 3
This document provides an overview of systematic reviews and the PRISMA statement. It discusses the importance of systematic reviews in evidence-based practice and their advantages over traditional narrative reviews. The PRISMA statement aims to improve reporting standards for systematic reviews through a 27-item checklist and four-phase flow diagram to help authors and readers.
Part 1 Introduction to Evidence-based Medicine Literature Searching
Evidence-based medicine involves integrating the best available research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values. It uses a three pronged approach considering the best evidence, clinical expertise, and patient preferences. Practitioners must be able to ask clinical questions, acquire the best evidence such as through literature searches, assess the evidence through critical appraisal, and apply the evidence to their patients. Literature searching is an important skill for healthcare professionals to master to engage in evidence-based practice and lifelong learning. It requires understanding key concepts and having certain prerequisites such as knowing how to use search tools and formulate clinical questions.
Using the Library - DNP Bound
The document provides an overview of evidence-based practice and how to search for evidence, including forming a focused clinical question using PICO, using Boolean operators and subject headings to search bibliographic databases, applying limiters and filters, and consulting point-of-care tools and librarians. Key parts of the evidence-based practice process are identified, such as the hierarchy of research evidence, appraising and implementing evidence, and maintaining search alerts.
Using the Library - DNP Bound PDF
The document provides an overview of evidence-based practice and how to search for evidence to answer clinical questions. It discusses forming a focused clinical question using the PICO framework and searching strategies like Boolean operators, subject headings, and limiters. Resources for finding evidence are also outlined, including bibliographic databases, point of care tools, and citation management software.
Using the Library / Searching for the Evidence
This document provides an overview of how to use the library for evidence-based practice. It discusses defining evidence-based practice and the evidence hierarchy. It then outlines the steps for searching, including forming a focused clinical question using PICO, using Boolean operators and subject headings, and limiting searches. Finally, it identifies sources for locating evidence such as bibliographic databases, point of care tools, and citation management.
Research Methodology.pptx
This document provides an overview of key concepts in research methodology. It discusses the aims of research, types of research, conceptual frameworks, literature reviews, research questions and hypotheses, study objectives, research methods including quantitative and qualitative approaches, variables, data collection and analysis, biostatistics, and estimation. The document is intended to help readers understand the basic concepts of research and how to conduct research appropriately.
Systematic Reviews and Knowledge Syntheses: What a Librarian Needs to Know
Librarians can play important roles in supporting systematic reviews and knowledge syntheses by conducting comprehensive literature searches, developing search strategies, managing references, and acquiring the necessary skills through training. As the number of systematic reviews and syntheses grows, standards and guidelines have been developed for conducting reviews. Agencies that fund reviews also recommend or require the involvement of a librarian with the appropriate competencies to support the review process.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE.pptx
Review of literature
This chapter deals with following topics:
Define the concept of literature review
Recognize the importance of literature review
Discuss the purpose of literature review
Explain the types of literature review
Enumerate the sources of literature review
Identify the criteria for selecting resources
Identify and explain the steps for conducting literature review
Review of literature is one of the most important steps in the research process .It accounts for what is already known about a particular phenomenon.
The main purpose of review of literature is to convey to the readers about the work already done and the knowledge and ideas that have been already established on a particular topic of research.
Importance:
To gain background knowledge
Find out problems in the area of interest
Know what others have found out about the subject and how they have done
To find out various concepts relating to it and the potential relationship between them.
To identify potential areas & hypothesis for research
Identification of relevant theoretical or conceptual framework for research problem
To identify potential sources of information for conducting research.
To provide support for the design of research methodology and techniques of analysis.
Determination of any gaps in a body of knowledge
Determination of a need to replicate a prior study.
TYPES:
TRADITIONAL
SYSTEMIC
META ANALYSIS
META SYNTHESIS.
TRADITIONAL METHOD:
It presents Summary of Literature & draws conclusion about the topic in Question
SYSTEMIC:
The main aim is to find out the answer for well focused question of clinical practice.
It should include the methods used for searching, evaluating and synthesizing the literature
Suggested criteria in certain aspects literature review are
Formulation of research question.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria for literature.
Selection and access of literature.
To assess the quality of literature.
Analyze, synthesize and disseminate the findings
It provide a comprehensive .back ground of subject under study
It is essential for getting in-depth insight in subject area, refining the research question and hypotheses and identifying the gaps and inconsistencies in existing literature.
META ANALYSIS:
Meta-analysis is to involve finding of several quantitative studies on single subject area and carry out statistical computations on them using standardized statistical techniques and procedures
META SYNTHESIS:
Meta-synthesis is the non statistical techniques used to integrate ,evaluated and interpret the finding of multiple qualitative research studies .
SOURCES:
Primary
secondary
Teritary
PRIMARY:
Research publications written by the person or people who conducted the research/ theorists who developed the theory
SECONDARY:
Research reports prepared by someone other than the original researcher
Authors paraphrase the works of original researcher
NURSING DATABASE:
CINAHL
MEDLINE
PubMed
British Nursing Index
Medline Plus
Nur
HN313 Library Lecture Jan 26
This document provides library resources and search tips for nutrition research. It lists the objectives of finding appropriate library resources, distinguishing between types of scientific literature, and using keywords effectively to search PubMed. Useful research guides are listed for topics like nutrition, public health, and epidemiology. The research process is described as iterative, with developing topics as search is done. Scholarly vs. popular information sources are distinguished. Primary, secondary and tertiary literature are defined. Tips are provided for evaluating information sources and reading scientific literature critically. Methods of tracking search terms and using controlled vocabularies in databases are outlined.
Systematic reviews
This document provides an introduction and overview of systematic reviews. It defines systematic reviews and their key characteristics, including having a clearly defined question and methodology for systematically searching, appraising, and synthesizing the available evidence to answer a specific question. It contrasts systematic reviews with other types of literature reviews and outlines the main steps in planning and conducting a systematic review, including developing a protocol and search strategy.
Edmedia2011 lit.sys.review
The document provides an overview of literature reviews and systematic reviews. It discusses the key elements and steps in conducting a traditional narrative literature review, including developing a problem statement, searching literature databases and the internet, organizing search results, and critically reading and analyzing findings. It then contrasts systematic reviews as being more rigorous, focused on a single question, and aimed at limiting bias through comprehensive and explicit search strategies, criterion-based selection of studies, and quantitative data synthesis. The document outlines the main steps in conducting a systematic review, from developing a focused question and protocol to locating relevant information from various sources and managing the data.
Systematic reviews
This document provides an overview of the history and process of systematic reviews. It discusses how Karl Pearson was one of the first to synthesize data from multiple studies in 1904. It also discusses how Archie Cochrane advocated for systematic reviews in 1979. The number of systematic reviews has grown significantly from 1990 to 2007. The document then outlines the steps involved in conducting a systematic review, including developing a focused question, searching multiple databases, appraising evidence, and documenting methods. It emphasizes starting organized with tools like spreadsheets and citation managers.
RESEARCH METHODLOGY final 28-2-16.pptx
This document provides an overview of research methodology. It defines research as a systematic process using scientific methods to gain new knowledge. The document discusses why research is important, noting it allows for progress through inquiry. It also outlines the typical steps in conducting research, including selecting a topic, reviewing literature, developing research questions and objectives, determining methodology, collecting and analyzing data, discussing results, and presenting conclusions. Finally, it provides guidance on writing research articles, such as how to structure the paper, format references, and address ethical considerations.
eahil cpd pilot program. Webinar 50 shades of review
A realist synthesis is a method that can be used to bring together quantitative and qualitative studies within the same review. The key methods that cannot be used to combine quantitative and qualitative studies in the same review are:
- Meta-analysis - As this requires quantitative data that can be statistically pooled. Qualitative evidence is not suited to statistical pooling.
- Narrative summary - As this involves simply selecting, ordering and chronicling evidence without formal synthesis or interpretation. It does not integrate different evidence types.
Realist synthesis is suited to integrating quantitative and qualitative evidence as it seeks to develop explanatory theoretical frameworks or program theories about how and why interventions/programs work (or don't work) in particular contexts. It can incorporate different evidence types
Introduction To Research Methodology
The document provides an introduction to research methodology. It outlines the key steps in the research process as: (1) formulating the research question by identifying gaps in existing literature through a literature review; (2) developing hypotheses and objectives; and (3) preparing a research design that includes determining the sample, data collection methods, and data analysis plan. It also discusses important qualities of good research such as being controlled, rigorous, systematic, valid and verifiable.
Literature Reviews
This document discusses literature reviews, including what they are, their functions, and how to conduct them. It notes that literature reviews critically examine and synthesize existing research on a topic, rather than just summarizing findings. They help justify future research, contextualize new findings, interpret studies, and cope with information overload. The document contrasts traditional, subjective reviews with systematic reviews that use explicit, reproducible methods. It outlines the key steps in conducting a systematic review, including formulating a research question, defining eligibility criteria, identifying relevant studies, assessing quality, analyzing findings, and structuring a report.
Psychiatry clerkship
This document provides resources for clinical reasoning exercises for psychiatry clerks. It discusses formulating clinical research questions using the PICO framework and identifying relevant databases for searching. It also covers applying basic criteria to appraise evidence quality, such as publication type, sample size, methodology. Contact information is provided for the librarian as a resource for more information on search strategies, citation styles, and databases.
7681 110509113034-phpapp02
This document discusses evidence-based medicine, specifically meta-analyses and systematic reviews. It defines a systematic review as a rigorous collection and summary of primary studies on a focused question. Meta-analyses use quantitative methods to combine results across multiple studies. The document emphasizes that meta-analyses must be conducted systematically and transparently to prevent bias. It provides guidance on critically appraising overviews by assessing whether results are valid, summarizing the results, and determining if the results will help patient care. Key factors in evaluating validity include focused questions, appropriate study selection criteria, comprehensive searches, and measures to control for bias like duplicate data extraction.
Systematic review my presentation.pptx
This document provides an overview of how to conduct a systematic review. It defines what a systematic review is and compares it to a traditional narrative review. Some key aspects covered include developing a protocol with a review team, formulating an answerable question using PICO, systematically searching literature and selecting studies, assessing study quality, extracting and analyzing data, and interpreting results. The document provides examples and outlines the major steps to follow in a high-quality systematic review.
Similar to Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Systematic Reviews (20)
Part 1 Introduction to Evidence-based Medicine Literature Searching
Part 1 Introduction to Evidence-based Medicine Literature Searching
Systematic Reviews and Knowledge Syntheses: What a Librarian Needs to Know
Systematic Reviews and Knowledge Syntheses: What a Librarian Needs to Know
eahil cpd pilot program. Webinar 50 shades of review
eahil cpd pilot program. Webinar 50 shades of review
More from lynnkysh
Evidence-Based Practice Introduction
This document provides an overview of evidence-based medicine resources available through the Norris Medical Library. It discusses the steps of evidence-based practice, including formulating a searchable clinical question using PICO. An example scenario is presented where a patient asks if vitamin D and calcium can prevent falls. The scenario is used to demonstrate how to develop a PICO question. Finally, the document reviews the evidence pyramid and different publication types used to evaluate medical evidence.
NIH Public Access Policy: After You Publish
This document provides information on tracking compliance with the NIH Public Access Policy after publication. It discusses using eRA Commons and NIH RePORTER to find grant information and publications. It also covers locating author agreements to ensure they allow submission to PubMed Central and examples of publisher policies, including straightforward language from Elsevier and less clear language from the American Journal of Public Health. Finally, it lists additional resources on the NIH Public Access Policy.
NIH Public Access Policy: Ready to Publish
This document provides information about the NIH Public Access Policy, which requires authors to submit final peer-reviewed manuscripts from NIH-funded research to PubMed Central no later than 12 months after publication. It discusses finding copyright transfer information, potential examples of publisher policies, and the four methods for submitting manuscripts to PubMed Central - which include submission by the publisher, author, or directly to NIH. Additional resources are also provided.
NIH Public Access Policy: You Received NIH Funding
The document outlines the responsibilities of a primary investigator (PI) who receives NIH funding. The PI must act as a liaison between NIH and ensure publications acknowledge NIH funding and include required disclaimers. The PI is responsible for depositing manuscripts into PubMed Central and communicating NIH policy requirements to students, collaborators, and subcontractors on funded projects.
NIH Public Access Policy: Overview
This document provides an overview of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy, which requires investigators funded by NIH to submit final peer-reviewed manuscripts to PubMed Central upon acceptance for publication, to be made publicly available no later than 12 months after official publication. It defines a PubMed Identification Number (PMID) and PubMed Central Identification Number (PMCID), and outlines the policy's applicability and compliance responsibilities. The principal investigator is responsible for ensuring the final manuscript is submitted through one of four methods: publisher submission to PubMed Central, submission to NIH's manuscript submission system with publisher permission, direct submission to NIH's system, or publisher submission to NIH's system.
Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Appraisal Resources
This document provides an overview of resources for appraising medical information. It discusses tools like ACP Journal Club, DARE, and TheNNT that can help with appraisal. These tools allow for selection, summary, commentary, and dissemination of information. DARE specifically can be found through searching "Other Reviews" in Cochrane. The presentation emphasizes integrating evidence, clinical expertise, and patient values when appraising information.
More from lynnkysh (6)
NIH Public Access Policy: You Received NIH Funding
NIH Public Access Policy: You Received NIH Funding
Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Appraisal Resources
Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Appraisal Resources
Recently uploaded
Hindi varnamala | hindi alphabet PPT.pdf
हिंदी वर्णमाला पीपीटी, hindi alphabet PPT presentation, hindi varnamala PPT, Hindi Varnamala pdf, हिंदी स्वर, हिंदी व्यंजन, sikhiye hindi varnmala, dr. mulla adam ali, hindi language and literature, hindi alphabet with drawing, hindi alphabet pdf, hindi varnamala for childrens, hindi language, hindi varnamala practice for kids, https://www.drmullaadamali.com
Your Skill Boost Masterclass: Strategies for Effective Upskilling
Your Skill Boost Masterclass: Strategies for Effective UpskillingExcellence Foundation for South Sudan
Strategies for Effective Upskilling is a presentation by Chinwendu Peace in a Your Skill Boost Masterclass organisation by the Excellence Foundation for South Sudan on 08th and 09th June 2024 from 1 PM to 3 PM on each day.South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)Academy of Science of South Africa
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.Wound healing PPT
This document provides an overview of wound healing, its functions, stages, mechanisms, factors affecting it, and complications.
A wound is a break in the integrity of the skin or tissues, which may be associated with disruption of the structure and function.
Healing is the body’s response to injury in an attempt to restore normal structure and functions.
Healing can occur in two ways: Regeneration and Repair
There are 4 phases of wound healing: hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling. This document also describes the mechanism of wound healing. Factors that affect healing include infection, uncontrolled diabetes, poor nutrition, age, anemia, the presence of foreign bodies, etc.
Complications of wound healing like infection, hyperpigmentation of scar, contractures, and keloid formation.
clinical examination of hip joint (1).pdf
described clinical examination all orthopeadic conditions .
Reimagining Your Library Space: How to Increase the Vibes in Your Library No ...
Librarians are leading the way in creating future-ready citizens – now we need to update our spaces to match. In this session, attendees will get inspiration for transforming their library spaces. You’ll learn how to survey students and patrons, create a focus group, and use design thinking to brainstorm ideas for your space. We’ll discuss budget friendly ways to change your space as well as how to find funding. No matter where you’re at, you’ll find ideas for reimagining your space in this session.
Pengantar Penggunaan Flutter - Dart programming language1.pptx
Pengantar Penggunaan Flutter - Dart programming language1.pptx
Pollock and Snow "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape, Session One: Setting Expec...
Pollock and Snow "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape, Session One: Setting Expec...National Information Standards Organization (NISO)
This presentation was provided by Steph Pollock of The American Psychological Association’s Journals Program, and Damita Snow, of The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), for the initial session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session One: 'Setting Expectations: a DEIA Primer,' was held June 6, 2024.Main Java[All of the Base Concepts}.docx
This is part 1 of my Java Learning Journey. This Contains Custom methods, classes, constructors, packages, multithreading , try- catch block, finally block and more.
RHEOLOGY Physical pharmaceutics-II notes for B.pharm 4th sem students
Physical pharmaceutics notes for B.pharm students
How to Fix the Import Error in the Odoo 17
An import error occurs when a program fails to import a module or library, disrupting its execution. In languages like Python, this issue arises when the specified module cannot be found or accessed, hindering the program's functionality. Resolving import errors is crucial for maintaining smooth software operation and uninterrupted development processes.
How to Create a More Engaging and Human Online Learning Experience
How to Create a More Engaging and Human Online Learning Experience Wahiba Chair Training & Consulting
Wahiba Chair's Talk at the 2024 Learning Ideas Conference. The Diamonds of 2023-2024 in the IGRA collection
A review of the growth of the Israel Genealogy Research Association Database Collection for the last 12 months. Our collection is now passed the 3 million mark and still growing. See which archives have contributed the most. See the different types of records we have, and which years have had records added. You can also see what we have for the future.
BBR 2024 Summer Sessions Interview Training
Qualitative research interview training by Professor Katrina Pritchard and Dr Helen Williams
Recently uploaded (20)
Your Skill Boost Masterclass: Strategies for Effective Upskilling
Your Skill Boost Masterclass: Strategies for Effective Upskilling
Liberal Approach to the Study of Indian Politics.pdf
Liberal Approach to the Study of Indian Politics.pdf
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
South African Journal of Science: Writing with integrity workshop (2024)
Reimagining Your Library Space: How to Increase the Vibes in Your Library No ...
Reimagining Your Library Space: How to Increase the Vibes in Your Library No ...
NEWSPAPERS - QUESTION 1 - REVISION POWERPOINT.pptx
NEWSPAPERS - QUESTION 1 - REVISION POWERPOINT.pptx
Pengantar Penggunaan Flutter - Dart programming language1.pptx
Pengantar Penggunaan Flutter - Dart programming language1.pptx
Pollock and Snow "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape, Session One: Setting Expec...
Pollock and Snow "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape, Session One: Setting Expec...
RHEOLOGY Physical pharmaceutics-II notes for B.pharm 4th sem students
RHEOLOGY Physical pharmaceutics-II notes for B.pharm 4th sem students
How to Create a More Engaging and Human Online Learning Experience
How to Create a More Engaging and Human Online Learning Experience
Keck Year 2 Evidence Based Medicine - Systematic Reviews
- 1. Systematic Reviews Lynn Kysh, MLIS kysh@usc.edu Information Services Librarian Norris Medical Library
- 2. Evidence Pyramid – Publication Types Evidence-Based Guidelines Systematic Review & Metaanalysis Higher Quality of Information Fewer Articles Randomized Controlled Trials Cohort Studies Case Control Studies Lower Quality of Information More Articles Case Series, Case Reports
- 3. Agenda • Distinguish a systematic review from a standard literature review • Locate the following in PubMed • Reviews • Systematic Reviews • Meta-Analyses • Introduce Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- 4. Source: Evidence-Based Living Blog (Cornell University) http://evidencebasedliving.human.cornell.edu/
- 5. Definition Literature Review Systematic Review Qualitatively summarizes evidence on a topic using informal or subjective methods to collect and interpret studies. High-level overview of primary research that identifies, selects, synthesizes, an d appraises all relevant high quality research evidence
- 6. Goal Literature Review • Provide summary or overview of topic Systematic Review • Answer a focused clinical question • Eliminate bias
- 7. Questio n Literature Review • Can be a general topic or a specific question Systematic Review • Clearly defined and answerable clinical question • Recommend using PICO as a guide
- 8. Componen ts Literature Review • Introduction • Methods • Discussion • Conclusion • Reference list Systematic Review • Pre-specified eligibility criteria • Systematic search strategy • Assessment of the validity of findings • Interpretation and presentation of results • Reference list
- 9. Hormone therapy for preventing cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women Main Cm Knight B, Moxham T, Sanchez RG, Sanchez Gomex LM, Figuls MR, Cosp XB.
- 10. Hormone therapy for preventing cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women Main Cm Knight B, Moxham T, Sanchez RG, Sanchez Gomex LM, Figuls MR, Cosp XB.
- 11. Literature Review • 1 or more Author s Systematic Review • 3 or more Skills Literature Review • Understanding of topic • Perform searches in one or more database Systematic Review • Thorough knowledge of topic • Perform searches in all relevant database • Statistical analysis resources (meta-analysis)
- 12. Tim e Literature Review • Weeks to months Systematic Review • Months to years • Average eighteen months
- 13. Valu e Literature Review • Provides summary of the literature on a topic Systematic Review • Connects practicing clinicians to high quality evidence • Supports evidence-based practice
- 14. Meta-Analyses Systematic Reviews All Review Articles Adapted from: Pai M, McCulloch M, Gorman JD, Pai N, Enanoria W, Kennedy G, Tharyan P, and Colford JM. “Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: An illustrated, step-by-step guide” The National Medical Journal of India (2004)
- 15. Finding review articles: Use “Article Type” filter
- 17. Finding systematic reviews: Use Basic Search
- 18. Agenda • Distinguish a systematic review from a standard literature review • Locate the following in PubMed • Reviews • Systematic Reviews • Meta-Analyses • Introduce Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- 19. Questions? Lynn Kysh, MLIS Information Services Librarian kysh@usc.edu (323) 442-1124
- 20. Thanks! Lynn Kysh, MLIS Information Services Librarian kysh@usc.edu (323) 442-1124