A basic introduction to rapid reviews, created for a graduate student workshop, March 2018, presented by PF Anderson from the University of Michigan. Includes links to more resources, standards and guidelines, tools, software, and more.
A systematic review uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, critically appraise, and extract and analyze data from relevant research [Higgins & Green 2011].
bSEO Claudia Higgins _ Breaking down silos_ how integrated data sets enhance ...Claudia Higgins
How we should be thinking about data when measuring SEO performance and finding opportunities - data sources need to be combined to show us the whole picture.
How to Write Scientific Research Article? A General GuideNabeel Salih Ali
A general guide for writing a scientific research article, present all methods and strategies regarding article structure, common research sections, IMRAD techniques and so on.
A systematic review uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, critically appraise, and extract and analyze data from relevant research [Higgins & Green 2011].
bSEO Claudia Higgins _ Breaking down silos_ how integrated data sets enhance ...Claudia Higgins
How we should be thinking about data when measuring SEO performance and finding opportunities - data sources need to be combined to show us the whole picture.
How to Write Scientific Research Article? A General GuideNabeel Salih Ali
A general guide for writing a scientific research article, present all methods and strategies regarding article structure, common research sections, IMRAD techniques and so on.
A systematic review (SR) is a rigorous and organized method to synthesize
the evidence from multiple studies on a particular research question or topic.
The purpose of a systematic review is to identify, appraise, and summarize all
available evidence relevant to a specific research question in a transparent
and replicable manner.
It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of academic literature
concerning a particular research question of topic.
This presentation explores the steps nee
University of Liverpool Library Researcher KnowHow session 2 of 3 presented by Michelle Maden PhD MAFHEA Postdoc research associate in evidence synthesis at the University of Liverpool on 22nd November 2021.
Researcher KnowHow session at the University of Liverpool from 15th March 2021 presented by Ruaraidh Hill, Angela Boland, Michelle Maden.
The session provided advice on conducting key activities in a systematic review. It can also provide a ‘top-up’ to the 3 part series of workshops about systematic reviews which ran earlier in the academic session. Suitable for postgraduates and staff planning or doing a systematic review for the first time or who wish to brush up on their knowledge.
It focuses on key steps in doing a systematic review. It offers brief practical advice, showcase tools and share top tips for progressing your review.
This is a short introduction course to Stata statistical software version 9. The course still applies to later versions of Stata, too. The course duration was 9 hours. It has been given at the Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Cairo University.
A systematic review (SR) is a rigorous and organized method to synthesize
the evidence from multiple studies on a particular research question or topic.
The purpose of a systematic review is to identify, appraise, and summarize all
available evidence relevant to a specific research question in a transparent
and replicable manner.
It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of academic literature
concerning a particular research question of topic.
This presentation explores the steps nee
University of Liverpool Library Researcher KnowHow session 2 of 3 presented by Michelle Maden PhD MAFHEA Postdoc research associate in evidence synthesis at the University of Liverpool on 22nd November 2021.
Researcher KnowHow session at the University of Liverpool from 15th March 2021 presented by Ruaraidh Hill, Angela Boland, Michelle Maden.
The session provided advice on conducting key activities in a systematic review. It can also provide a ‘top-up’ to the 3 part series of workshops about systematic reviews which ran earlier in the academic session. Suitable for postgraduates and staff planning or doing a systematic review for the first time or who wish to brush up on their knowledge.
It focuses on key steps in doing a systematic review. It offers brief practical advice, showcase tools and share top tips for progressing your review.
This is a short introduction course to Stata statistical software version 9. The course still applies to later versions of Stata, too. The course duration was 9 hours. It has been given at the Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Cairo University.
A practical guide to do primary research on meta analysis methodology - PubricaPubrica
• Conventional meta-analysis research techniques are extended to accommodate methods and practices found in basic research.
• Apart from clinical research, where consolidation efforts are facilitated by systematic review and meta-analysis research, basic science occasionally use such rigorous quantitative methods.
Reference: http://bit.ly/2N2iVg8
Continue Reading: https://pubrica.com/services/research-services/meta-analysis/
Why Pubrica?
When you order our services, Plagiarism free|onTime|outstanding customer support|Unlimited Revisions support|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- 74248 10299
Retrospective versus | Meta analysis | Systematic literature reviewPubrica
Systematic review for prospective studies is a meticulous and essential process ensuring research findings’ reliability and validity. The key to success lies in adhering to a well-structured methodology that includes defining the research question, developing a comprehensive search strategy, screening studies based on pre-defined criteria, and critically appraising the selected articles.
https://pubrica.com/academy/manuscript-editing/conduct-a-systematic-review-for-prospective-studies/
How to extract data from your paper for systemic review - PubricaPubrica
Data should be extracted based on previously identified interventions and outcomes developed during the formulation of the study topic, inclusion/exclusion requirements, and search procedure.
Continue Reading: https://bit.ly/3m7OTqC
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
How to extract data from your paper for systemic review – PubricaPubrica
Data should be extracted based on previously identified interventions and outcomes developed during the formulation of the study topic, inclusion/exclusion requirements, and search procedure.
Continue Reading: https://bit.ly/3m7OTqC
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
Systematic literature review | Meta analysis | Retrospective versusPubrica
Systematic review for prospective studies is a meticulous and essential process ensuring research findings’ reliability and validity. The key to success lies in adhering to a well-structured methodology that includes defining the research question, developing a comprehensive search strategy, screening studies based on pre-defined criteria, and critically appraising the selected articles.
Read more @ https://pubrica.com/academy/manuscript-editing/conduct-a-systematic-review-for-prospective-studies/
A practical guide to do primary research on meta analysis methodology - PubricaPubrica
• Conventional meta-analysis research techniques are extended to accommodate methods and practices found in basic research.
• Apart from clinical research, where consolidation efforts are facilitated by systematic review and meta-analysis research, basic science occasionally use such rigorous quantitative methods.
Reference: http://bit.ly/2N2iVg8
Continue Reading: https://pubrica.com/services/research-services/meta-analysis/
Why Pubrica?
When you order our services, Plagiarism free|onTime|outstanding customer support|Unlimited Revisions support|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- 74248 10299
• A systematic review is a secondary research as it requires a careful analysis of the quality, quantity, and consistency of research findings.
• Systematic reviews formulate research questions that are specifically targeted and designed to provide a complete summary of the issue based on evidence.
• The methodology used in systematic reviews is specific and precise, which intends to minimize bias by increasing the reliability of the drawn conclusion.
Full information: https://bit.ly/2ZNTlPU
Reference: 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, outstanding customer support, written to Standard, Unlimited Revisions support and 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
Presentation on knowledge synthesis methodologies with a focus on engineering, for University of Michigan, October 25, 2023. Overview of the broader context, then focuses in on systematic reviews and tech mining.
PF Anderson presents for OLLI-UM on February 25, 2021. Graphic Medicine describes the genre of comics and graphic novels around healthcare, as told from personal and professional perspectives. Many think of comics as for children, but that could be risky with some of these! The personal experiences described can be tender or gritty, and touch on topics such as specific conditions, social justice, dying, lived experiences, resilience. Visual aspects of storytelling take advantage of new literacies, offering insights not possible through other mediums.
Brief lightning talk for UofM THL, repeated for MLA Research Caucus on January 27, 2021. On the subject of using systematic review search skills in combination with non-systematic review research methodologies.
As part of the #GraphicMedLibs panel for the August 5, 2020 NNLM NER webinar on Graphic Medicine, PF Anderson discussed awareness of #OwnVoices issues in both comics creation and collections, along with strategies and tools to utilize the #OwnVoices movement in the creation of community and awareness of social justice themes in #GraphicMedicine. This presentation represents the work of PF Anderson (UM-THL) with collaborators Claire Myers (UMSI), Gina Genova (UMSI), Susan Brown (Ypsilanti District Library), and David Carter (UM-AAEL).
"Research core facilities are centralized shared research resources that provide access to instruments, technologies, services, as well as expert consultation..." That sounds a lot like a library to me. What would look different about libraries if we thought of them as a research core facility?
This was a presentation for a research lab at the University of Michigan, May 28, 2019.
A storytelling workshop collaboration with Melissa Cunningham (Office of Patient Experience), Alex Fox (School of Public Health), and Patricia F. Anderson (Taubman Health Sciences Library). The focus of the workshop was on tools and strategies for telling patient and healthcare stories.
Slide deck for the Dent 610 graduate level course on research methods, 2018 version; collaboratively developed by Mark MacEachern, Patricia F. Anderson, and Tyler Nix.
Presented at Meaningful Play 2018, East Lansing, Michigan. Please note, the website for the game (http://aberrantry.com/) is in development at this time. The game code is in GitHub, & a download link is available at the website.
A design thinking approach to rapidly developing comics concepts. Workshop presentation by PF Anderson, University of Michigan. Developed for the Office of Health Equity and Inclusion.
Using design thinking strategies to help bootstrap developing a comic concept. A workshop presentation by PF Anderson for Enriching Scholarship, 2018, at the University of Michigan.
Tips and tricks for writing abstracts for science research articles to maximise citations and impact. Presented at the University of Michigan in May 2018.
A strategic approach to crafting abstracts for life sciences research publications to maximize their discovery in search engines as well as utility and citability for audiences beyond other researchers. This workshop was designed for the University of Michigan North Campus Research Center community.
A session for the Dent 610 course at the University of Michigan, on research methods and processes. Specific focus of this session on systematic review methods and processes, especially through database searching.
A presentation by Dr. David Cheney for the Investing in Abilities 2017 lecture series, on emerging technologies and tech strategies for empowerment, especially focused on using education to crowdsource solutions to interesting problems and develop compassion and a sense of humanity.
A presentation by Dr. Michelle A. Meade for the Investing in Abilities 2017 lecture series, on emerging technologies and tech strategies for empowerment.
Slides for a lightning round talk presented at Comics and Medicine, Seattle, also known as Graphic Medicine Conference, 2017. The project presented was by PF Anderson, Elise Wescom, Kai Donovan, and Ruth Carlos, and originally published in the December 2016 issue of the Journal of the American College of Radiology (JACR).
A poster by Kai Donovan, Elise Wescom, Mark Chaffee, Jean Song, Breanna Hamm, and Chase Masters for the 2017 Annual Meeting of the Medical Library Association.
Ethanol (CH3CH2OH), or beverage alcohol, is a two-carbon alcohol
that is rapidly distributed in the body and brain. Ethanol alters many
neurochemical systems and has rewarding and addictive properties. It
is the oldest recreational drug and likely contributes to more morbidity,
mortality, and public health costs than all illicit drugs combined. The
5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
(DSM-5) integrates alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence into a single
disorder called alcohol use disorder (AUD), with mild, moderate,
and severe subclassifications (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).
In the DSM-5, all types of substance abuse and dependence have been
combined into a single substance use disorder (SUD) on a continuum
from mild to severe. A diagnosis of AUD requires that at least two of
the 11 DSM-5 behaviors be present within a 12-month period (mild
AUD: 2–3 criteria; moderate AUD: 4–5 criteria; severe AUD: 6–11 criteria).
The four main behavioral effects of AUD are impaired control over
drinking, negative social consequences, risky use, and altered physiological
effects (tolerance, withdrawal). This chapter presents an overview
of the prevalence and harmful consequences of AUD in the U.S.,
the systemic nature of the disease, neurocircuitry and stages of AUD,
comorbidities, fetal alcohol spectrum disorders, genetic risk factors, and
pharmacotherapies for AUD.
Prix Galien International 2024 Forum ProgramLevi Shapiro
June 20, 2024, Prix Galien International and Jerusalem Ethics Forum in ROME. Detailed agenda including panels:
- ADVANCES IN CARDIOLOGY: A NEW PARADIGM IS COMING
- WOMEN’S HEALTH: FERTILITY PRESERVATION
- WHAT’S NEW IN THE TREATMENT OF INFECTIOUS,
ONCOLOGICAL AND INFLAMMATORY SKIN DISEASES?
- ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND ETHICS
- GENE THERAPY
- BEYOND BORDERS: GLOBAL INITIATIVES FOR DEMOCRATIZING LIFE SCIENCE TECHNOLOGIES AND PROMOTING ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE
- ETHICAL CHALLENGES IN LIFE SCIENCES
- Prix Galien International Awards Ceremony
New Directions in Targeted Therapeutic Approaches for Older Adults With Mantl...i3 Health
i3 Health is pleased to make the speaker slides from this activity available for use as a non-accredited self-study or teaching resource.
This slide deck presented by Dr. Kami Maddocks, Professor-Clinical in the Division of Hematology and
Associate Division Director for Ambulatory Operations
The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, will provide insight into new directions in targeted therapeutic approaches for older adults with mantle cell lymphoma.
STATEMENT OF NEED
Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare, aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) accounting for 5% to 7% of all lymphomas. Its prognosis ranges from indolent disease that does not require treatment for years to very aggressive disease, which is associated with poor survival (Silkenstedt et al, 2021). Typically, MCL is diagnosed at advanced stage and in older patients who cannot tolerate intensive therapy (NCCN, 2022). Although recent advances have slightly increased remission rates, recurrence and relapse remain very common, leading to a median overall survival between 3 and 6 years (LLS, 2021). Though there are several effective options, progress is still needed towards establishing an accepted frontline approach for MCL (Castellino et al, 2022). Treatment selection and management of MCL are complicated by the heterogeneity of prognosis, advanced age and comorbidities of patients, and lack of an established standard approach for treatment, making it vital that clinicians be familiar with the latest research and advances in this area. In this activity chaired by Michael Wang, MD, Professor in the Department of Lymphoma & Myeloma at MD Anderson Cancer Center, expert faculty will discuss prognostic factors informing treatment, the promising results of recent trials in new therapeutic approaches, and the implications of treatment resistance in therapeutic selection for MCL.
Target Audience
Hematology/oncology fellows, attending faculty, and other health care professionals involved in the treatment of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).
Learning Objectives
1.) Identify clinical and biological prognostic factors that can guide treatment decision making for older adults with MCL
2.) Evaluate emerging data on targeted therapeutic approaches for treatment-naive and relapsed/refractory MCL and their applicability to older adults
3.) Assess mechanisms of resistance to targeted therapies for MCL and their implications for treatment selection
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN HEALTHCARE.pdfAnujkumaranit
Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to the simulation of human intelligence processes by machines, especially computer systems. It encompasses tasks such as learning, reasoning, problem-solving, perception, and language understanding. AI technologies are revolutionizing various fields, from healthcare to finance, by enabling machines to perform tasks that typically require human intelligence.
Explore natural remedies for syphilis treatment in Singapore. Discover alternative therapies, herbal remedies, and lifestyle changes that may complement conventional treatments. Learn about holistic approaches to managing syphilis symptoms and supporting overall health.
263778731218 Abortion Clinic /Pills In Harare ,sisternakatoto
263778731218 Abortion Clinic /Pills In Harare ,ABORTION WOMEN’S CLINIC +27730423979 IN women clinic we believe that every woman should be able to make choices in her pregnancy. Our job is to provide compassionate care, safety,affordable and confidential services. That’s why we have won the trust from all generations of women all over the world. we use non surgical method(Abortion pills) to terminate…Dr.LISA +27730423979women Clinic is committed to providing the highest quality of obstetrical and gynecological care to women of all ages. Our dedicated staff aim to treat each patient and her health concerns with compassion and respect.Our dedicated group ABORTION WOMEN’S CLINIC +27730423979 IN women clinic we believe that every woman should be able to make choices in her pregnancy. Our job is to provide compassionate care, safety,affordable and confidential services. That’s why we have won the trust from all generations of women all over the world. we use non surgical method(Abortion pills) to terminate…Dr.LISA +27730423979women Clinic is committed to providing the highest quality of obstetrical and gynecological care to women of all ages. Our dedicated staff aim to treat each patient and her health concerns with compassion and respect.Our dedicated group of receptionists, nurses, and physicians have worked together as a teamof receptionists, nurses, and physicians have worked together as a team wwww.lisywomensclinic.co.za/
micro teaching on communication m.sc nursing.pdfAnurag Sharma
Microteaching is a unique model of practice teaching. It is a viable instrument for the. desired change in the teaching behavior or the behavior potential which, in specified types of real. classroom situations, tends to facilitate the achievement of specified types of objectives.
These simplified slides by Dr. Sidra Arshad present an overview of the non-respiratory functions of the respiratory tract.
Learning objectives:
1. Enlist the non-respiratory functions of the respiratory tract
2. Briefly explain how these functions are carried out
3. Discuss the significance of dead space
4. Differentiate between minute ventilation and alveolar ventilation
5. Describe the cough and sneeze reflexes
Study Resources:
1. Chapter 39, Guyton and Hall Textbook of Medical Physiology, 14th edition
2. Chapter 34, Ganong’s Review of Medical Physiology, 26th edition
3. Chapter 17, Human Physiology by Lauralee Sherwood, 9th edition
4. Non-respiratory functions of the lungs https://academic.oup.com/bjaed/article/13/3/98/278874
TEST BANK for Operations Management, 14th Edition by William J. Stevenson, Ve...kevinkariuki227
TEST BANK for Operations Management, 14th Edition by William J. Stevenson, Verified Chapters 1 - 19, Complete Newest Version.pdf
TEST BANK for Operations Management, 14th Edition by William J. Stevenson, Verified Chapters 1 - 19, Complete Newest Version.pdf
- Video recording of this lecture in English language: https://youtu.be/lK81BzxMqdo
- Video recording of this lecture in Arabic language: https://youtu.be/Ve4P0COk9OI
- Link to download the book free: https://nephrotube.blogspot.com/p/nephrotube-nephrology-books.html
- Link to NephroTube website: www.NephroTube.com
- Link to NephroTube social media accounts: https://nephrotube.blogspot.com/p/join-nephrotube-on-social-media.html
Ozempic: Preoperative Management of Patients on GLP-1 Receptor Agonists Saeid Safari
Preoperative Management of Patients on GLP-1 Receptor Agonists like Ozempic and Semiglutide
ASA GUIDELINE
NYSORA Guideline
2 Case Reports of Gastric Ultrasound
4. Rapid Review: Definition
“A formal definition for a rapid review does not exist. As such, we used the
following working definition, ‘a rapid review is a type of knowledge synthesis
in which components of the systematic review process are simplified or
omitted to produce information in a short period of time’.”
Andrea C. Tricco, Jesmin Antony, Wasifa Zarin, Lisa Strifler, Marco Ghassemi, John Ivory, Laure Perrier, Brian
Hutton, David Moher, and Sharon E. Straus. A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Med. 2015; 13:
224. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4574114/
7. Rapid Reviews in Context: More Types
● Comparative effectiveness
reviews
● Critical review
● Effectiveness reviews
● Health technology
assessment
● Literature review
● Mapping review /
Systematic map
Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J. 2009
Jun;26(2):91-108. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
HLWiki International: Rapid Reviews http://hlwiki.slais.ubc.ca/index.php/Rapid_reviews (Dean Giustini, 9 March 2018)
● Meta-analysis
● Mixed methods / Mixed
studies
● Multi-arm systematic review
● Overview
● Qualitative systematic
review / qualitative evidence
synthesis
● Rapid review
● Review of reviews
● Scoping review / Quick
scoping review
● State-of-the-art review
● Systematic review
● Systematic search and
review
● Systematized review
● Umbrella review
8. Rapid Reviews in Context: Time
“Traditional literature reviews do not apply additional statistical methods to
the materials found.
Systematic reviews take exponentially more time to do, from the search
strategy creation itself, to going through each retrieved citation in duplicate
or triplicate, to analyzing the data from the included articles.”
Melissa L. Rethlefsen. “I Want To Do a Systematic Review.”
https://liblog.mayo.edu/2013/05/01/i-want-to-do-a-systematic-review/
9. Rapid Reviews in Context: Time
● Systematic review
○ Recommended time =
12 months
○ Average or typical time =
23 months
○ Can range up to several years
● Rapid review
○ Average or typical time =
6 months
○ Can range from 1 month to a
year
10. Rapid Reviews Are Different … How?
Elements standard in systematic reviews that may be altered in rapid reviews
● SCOPE (type/number of questions; number of studies included)
● COMPREHENSIVENESS (search - databases, hand searching, date, setting, languages; study types; text
analysis)
● RIGOR (Eliminate dual study selection and/or data extraction; peer review)
● SYNTHESIS (Limit or eliminate risk of bias testing, quality assessment of studies, quality assessment of
evidence; analysis reduced to either quantitative or qualitative)
Roberfroid D, Fairon N, San Miguel L, Paulus D. Method — Rapid Reviews. KCE (Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre), KCE
Process Notes, 2017. https://kce.fgov.be/sites/default/files/atoms/files/Rapid_Review_0_0.pdf
11. Overview of Rapid Reviews (Tricco et al)
AC Tricco et al.. A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Med. 2015; 13: 224. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4574114/
13. Questions to ask yourself before you start
What is your topic?
What is your question?
Why this question? What is the goal?
Do you have the people and resources needed? How will you include stakeholders’ insights?
What data do you need to report? What data are you planning to capture? How?
How do you plan to minimize and assess bias in the question, team, process, data, etc?
When do you call it “done” or “good enough”? How will you decide?
Image credit: https://openclipart.org/detail/252546/prismatic-question-mark-fractal-5-no-background
14. #1 TIP:
TRANSPARENCY
RULES!!!
“Lesson 1: The notion of a rapid-review is
ill-defined. However, introducing one
methodology isn’t necessarily appropriate. What
is important is transparency behind the process.”
Rapid versus systematic reviews – part 2
https://blog.tripdatabase.com/2012/04/24/rapid
-versus-systematic-reviews-part-2/
Image source:
https://openclipart.org/detail/13842/beverage-glass-tumbler
15. #1 TIP:
TRANSPARENCY
RULES!!!
Keep detailed notes about your process
Keep records of search strategies, including
versions, and changes
Don’t get confused by test runs of data
analysis from draft versions of search; wait
until search is final, and clearly label the final
data set for analysis.
Include file naming conventions that include
metadata such as date of file or search. Image source:
https://openclipart.org/detail/182192/papillon-transparent
16. #2 TIP: AVOID BIAS!!!
Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool
http://methods.cochrane.org/bias/assessing-risk
-bias-included-studies
● Selection bias
● Performance bias
● Detection bias
● Attrition bias
● Reporting bias
● Other bias
Image source: Higgins JPT et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s
tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.
BMJ 2011; 343 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d5928
(Published 18 October 2011)
19. Limiting the search may introduce bias
“Systematic reviews may be compromised by selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses.
Selective inclusion occurs when there are multiple effect estimates in a trial report that could be included in
a particular meta-analysis (e.g. from multiple measurement scales and time points) and the choice of effect
estimate to include in the meta-analysis is based on the results (e.g. statistical significance, magnitude or
direction of effect). Selective reporting occurs when the reporting of a subset of outcomes and analyses in
the systematic review is based on the results (e.g. a protocol-defined outcome is omitted from the published
systematic review).” (Page et al, 2014, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25271098)
“Do bodies of evidence that are based on abbreviated literature searches lead to different conclusions
about benefits and harms of interventions compared with bodies of evidence that are based on
comprehensive, systematic literature searches?” (Nussbaumer-Streit et al, 2016,
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5120483/)
20. Limiting the search (report accurately)
● Limiting terms
○ Most potentially serious way to introduce bias. If working from a prior search, may eliminate terms if validated
for sensitivity & specificity of retrieval. Validating terms can be time consuming in a complex search strategy.
○ Can make use of a term more specific by limiting MeSH heading to major [MAJR] or limiting textwords to when
they appear in title/abstract [TIAB] or title [TI].
● Databases
○ MEDLINE, COCHRANE, EMBASE, or … ?
● Handsearching
○ Grey literature sources, table of contents, number of journals selected for custom review, eliminate document
types such as theses, textbooks, etc.
● Dates
○ Be thoughtful. Don’t limit dates if this will exclude important developments in the topic being examined.
● Language
○ If your topic was invented, discovered, or is especially common in a non-English speaking country, you probably
need to include that language in the review.
21. Limiting the search (report accurately)
● Setting
● Study types
● Publication types
● Methodologies
● Age limits
● Geographic area
Image credit(s):
https://openclipart.org/detail/194606/zone-search-pattern |
https://openclipart.org/detail/194604/line-search-pattern |
https://openclipart.org/detail/194603/grid-search-pattern |
https://openclipart.org/detail/224996/spiral-search-pattern
23. Example Protocol Elements & Structure
Opening content
● Title
● Team & Institution
● Summary, Background, Purpose, Goals, Why
Body
● Question / Topic / Definitions of Terms
● Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria
● Risk of bias assessment for this study
● Outputs
Methods
● Search
● Data screening
● Quality assessment
● Bias assessment/evaluation in data
● Data extraction
● Synthesis
Closing content
● Stakeholders
● Funding & COI
● Additional or supporting materials
● Timeline
24. Sentinel (NOT Seminal) Articles: Selection
Seminal Articles
● Highly significant
● Influential
● Important
● By a leader in defining the research in the
field; often the first on a particular topic,
method, or concept
● Key studies. Also called: pivotal research,
landmark study, classic
Sentinel Articles
● On topic, not broader or narrower
● Well-indexed with appropriate terms
● Representative of citations that would be
retrieved by a well-done search
● Each sentinel article must represent ALL
desired concepts in the search
● Articles selected must meet ALL inclusion and
exclusion criteria.
25. Sentinel (NOT Seminal) Articles: Uses
Term generation process
● Variant terms & related concepts found in
sentinel articles are likely to include terms &
concepts that might have been otherwise
missed
● Look here:
○ Titles
○ Abstracts
○ Keywords
○ Cataloging terms (ie. MeSH)
○ Bibliographies
Search validation
● Can help to minimize accidental bias in the
search strategy
● Can draw attention to gaps in the search
which otherwise might not become apparent
until after publication
26. Inclusion / Exclusion Criteria
INCLUSION CRITERIA
● Required; reduces confounding variables
● Provide rationale or justification for these
criteria
● Examples:
○ Dates
○ Language
○ Types of participants / methodologies
○ Type of analysis
○ Context or location
○ Outcome measures
SEE: Meline T. Selecting Studies for Systematic Review: Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria. Contemporary Issues in
Communication Science and Disorders 2006 33:21–27.
https://www.asha.org/uploadedfiles/asha/publications/cicsd/2006sselectingstudiesforsystematicreview.pdf
Image credit: https://openclipart.org/detail/169757/check-and-cross-marks
EXCLUSION CRITERIA
● Makes sample or subject ineligible
● Provide rationale or justification for these
criteria
● Examples:
○ Publication type / article type
○ Out of scope, lack of diagnosis, ineligible for
treatment proposed
○ Unclear or mixed population
○ Reverse of specific inclusion criteria
○ Outcomes/population/methods not reported
in sufficient detail
27. Screening & Interrater Reliability (Simplified)
Step 0: Calibration & interrater reliability tuning
● Receive blinded dataset from search. Dataset should include only the title, abstract, and unique identifier.
Abstract may be truncated as delivered from the database
● Test initial sample (~50?) of articles with title/abstract screening with both screeners, independently.
● From the title and/or abstract (as exported from the database), are you able to determine whether an articles
matches inclusion/exclusion criteria, and should be selected or discarded?
● Both screeners meet to compare decisions, review inclusion/exclusion criteria, determine criteria for reaching
consensus, decide whether to revise methods or move forward.
Step 1: Title & Abstract screening
Step 2: Full article screening applied to articles remaining after Step 1 screening
Step 3: Request clarifying information from the original authors for final inclusion/exclusion decision regarding articles
remaining from Step 2 screening for which doubt remains or for which there is a lack of consensus between screeners.
28. Data Extraction / Abstraction
For final set of included articles, review each article for metadata, quality criteria, relevant methodology
details, as well as specific data regarding the inclusion criteria, and other items of interest.
Data is recorded in a form, template, spreadsheet, or other tool to allow comparison between the included
studies and support synthesis across the final dataset.
29. Data Extraction /
Abstraction: Simple
Example
Appendix 2: Example data extraction form for systematic
reviews. FROM: Effects of a demand-led evidence briefing
service on the uptake and use of research evidence by
commissioners of health services: a controlled
before-and-after study.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK424005/
30. Data Extraction / Abstraction: Templates
Cochrane
● Training:
○ Data collection forms for intervention reviews http://training.cochrane.org/resource/data-collection-forms-intervention-reviews
○ Example file:
http://training.cochrane.org/sites/training.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/resources/downloadable_resources/English/Collecting
%20data%20-%20form%20for%20RCTs%20and%20non-RCTs.doc
● Airways:
http://airways.cochrane.org/sites/airways.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/Data%20collection%20form%20for%20in
tervention%20reviews%20for%20RCTs%20and%20non-RCTs.doc
● Cochrane Consumers & Communication Review Group
http://cccrg.cochrane.org/sites/cccrg.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/det_2015_revised_final_june_20_2016_nov_2
9_revised.doc
● Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders:
http://cfgd.cochrane.org/sites/cfgd.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/Study%20selection%20%26%20%20extraction%
20form%20RM5.doc
● Public Health Group:
https://ph.cochrane.org/sites/ph.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/CPHG%20Data%20extraction%20template_0.docx
31. Data Extraction / Abstraction: Tools
Specialty Software
● Abstrackr http://abstrackr.cebm.brown.edu/account/login
● Covidence https://www.covidence.org/
● DistillerSR https://www.evidencepartners.com/products/distillersr-systematic-review-software/
● RevMan http://community.cochrane.org/tools/review-production-tools/revman-5
Software for systematic reviewing http://hlwiki.slais.ubc.ca/index.php/Software_for_systematic_reviewing
SR Toolbox: http://systematicreviewtools.com/index.php
38. Standards for Rapid Reviews: WHO
Andrea C. Tricco, Etienne V. Langlois and Sharon E. Straus. Rapid reviews to strengthen health
policy and systems: a practical guide. World Health Organization, Alliance for Health Policy and
Systems Research (Tricco).
<http://www.who.int/alliance-hpsr/resources/publications/rapid-review-guide/en/>
142 pages:
<http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/258698/1/9789241512763-eng.pdf?ua=1>
>>>>> 8 page summary:
<http://www.who.int/alliance-hpsr/resources/publications/alliancehpsr_rapidreviewchapterbrie
fs_2018.pdf?ua=1>
2 page flyer:
<http://www.who.int/alliance-hpsr/events/HPSR-flyer-practical-guide-20170811.pdf?ua=1>
39. Standards for
Rapid Reviews:
WHO
Andrea C. Tricco, Etienne V. Langlois and
Sharon E. Straus. Rapid reviews to
strengthen health policy and systems: a
practical guide. World Health Organization,
Alliance for Health Policy and Systems
Research (Tricco).
<http://www.who.int/alliance-hpsr/resource
s/publications/rapid-review-guide/en/>
40. Standards for Rapid Reviews: AMSTAR
● AMSTAR <https://amstar.ca/>
● Checklist <https://amstar.ca/Amstar_Checklist.php>
● Checklist as PDF <https://amstar.ca/docs/AMSTAR-2.pdf>
Mattivi JT, Buchberger B. USING THE AMSTAR CHECKLIST FOR RAPID REVIEWS: IS IT FEASIBLE? International
Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 2016 32(4):276-283.
<https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/F9E1C970CE082DCCB83958
C0E32D9747/S0266462316000465a.pdf/using_the_amstar_checklist_for_rapid_reviews_is_it_feasible.pdf>
43. Why a Protocol?
“Without review protocols, how can we be assured that decisions made
during the research process aren’t arbitrary, or that the decision to
include/exclude studies/data in a review aren’t made in light of knowledge
about individual study findings?”
Larissa Shameer & David Moher. Planning a systematic review? Think protocols. BMC Research in progress
blog 2015.
<http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2015/01/05/planning-a-systematic-review-think-protocols/>
44. Protocol Examples
*Rapid Review Protocol - Interventions to promote healthy eating choices when dining out: A systematic
review of reviews
<http://www.behaviourworksaustralia.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Rapid-Review-Protocol.pdf>
*Rapid Review protocol for Post Operative Pain Outcome Measures Study (POPOS)
<http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/1070>
*Rashek Kazi, Bryan Carroll, Andrea Ketchum. The quantification of patient pain: a rapid review of four
commonly employed rating scales. PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018091058 Available from:
<http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018091058> [PROSPERO:
<https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/>]
Protocol for a Rapid Evidence Review of Traditional and Complementary Medicine for People with Diabetes
Receiving Palliative or End-of-Life Care
<https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8e2b/f4b9287ab7a2f5a9b6ce3c44d1df71d1acda.pdf>
45. Rapid Review Examples
Armoiry X et al. Digital Clinical Communication for Families and Caregivers of Children or Young People With
Short- or Long-Term Conditions: Rapid Review. J Med Internet Res. 2018 Jan 5;20(1):e5.
http://www.jmir.org/2018/1/e5/
Coster JE et al. Why Do People Choose Emergency and Urgent Care Services? A Rapid Review Utilizing a
Systematic Literature Search and Narrative Synthesis. Acad Emerg Med. 2017 Sep; 24(9): 1137–1149.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5599959/
Manafò E et al. Patient and public engagement in priority setting: A systematic rapid review of the literature.
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 2;13(3):e0193579. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193579. eCollection 2018.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0193579
Slade SC, Philip K, Morris ME. Frameworks for embedding a research culture in allied health practice: a rapid
review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Mar 21;16(1):29.
https://health-policy-systems.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12961-018-0304-2
46. Variants, Methods
The use of rapid review methods in health technology assessments: 3 case studies. BMC Medical Research
Methodology December 2016, 16:108 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12874-016-0216-1
Expediting citation screening using PICo-based title-only screening for identifying studies in scoping searches
and rapid reviews https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5702220/
A scoping review of rapid review methods
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4574114/pdf/12916_2015_Article_465.pdf
Quality of conduct and reporting in rapid reviews: an exploration of compliance with PRISMA and AMSTAR
guidelines. Syst Rev. 2016; 5: 79. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4862155/
Turner J, Preston L, Booth A, et al. “Chapter 3: Review methods / Rapid review methods.” What evidence is
there for a relationship between organisational features and patient outcomes in congenital heart disease
services? A rapid review. Health Services and Delivery Research, No. 2.43. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals
Library; 2014 Nov. <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK263605/>
49. More Information on Rapid Reviews
Jon Brassey <https://rapid-reviews.info/>
Roberfroid D, Fairon N, San Miguel L, Paulus D. Method – Rapid reviews. Methods Brussels: Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE).
2016. KCE Process Notes. D/2017/10.273/01. <https://kce.fgov.be/sites/default/files/atoms/files/Rapid_Review_0_0.pdf>
Bianca Kramer: <https://www.slideshare.net/bmkramer/how-rapid-is-a-rapid-review>
TheEvidenceDoc: <http://www.g-i-n.net/conference/past-conferences/10th-conference/tuesday/8-30-am-to-12-00-pm/ireland-52.pdf>
Short Course: <https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/scharr/shortcourseunit/rapidreviews2018>
Tricco et al: Systematic reviews vs. rapid reviews: What’s the difference?
<https://www.cadth.ca/media/events/Andrea-Tricco_RR-vs-Systematic-Reviews_Feb-4-2015.pdf>
Ottawa Hospital: A methodology for conducting repaid evidence reviews.
<http://www.g-i-n.net/document-store/regional-communities/g-i-n-north-america/slides-a-methodology-for-conducting-repaid-evidence-r
eviews>
50. Library Guides
* VCU Libraries: Research Guides: Rapid Review Protocol <https://guides.library.vcu.edu/rapidreview>
* HL Wiki International: Rapid Reviews: <http://hlwiki.slais.ubc.ca/index.php/Rapid_reviews>
Temple University: Systematic Reviews & Other Review Types: What is a Rapid Review?
<http://guides.temple.edu/c.php?g=78618&p=4156608>
Becker Medical Library: Systematic Reviews: Rapid Reviews
<http://beckerguides.wustl.edu/c.php?g=299565&p=2000687>