Twelve tips for medical students to conduct a systematic review

References

• Alper BS, Hand JA, Elliott SG, Kinkade S, Hauan MJ, Onion DK, Sklar BM. 2004. How much effort is needed to keep up with the literature relevant for primary care? J Med Libr Assoc. 92:429–437.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre. 2011. Systematic review protocol & support template. 2011. UK: PROSPERO; [accessed 2017 Sep 17]. http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPEROFILES/3611_STRATEGY_20130031.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Meerpohl J, Norris S, et al. 2011. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 64:401–406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett LM, Gadlin H. 2012. Collaboration and team science: from theory to practice. J Investig Med. 60:768–775.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betini M, Volpato ES, Anastacio GD, de Faria RT, El Dib R. 2014. Choosing the right journal for your systematic review. J Eval Clin Pract. 20:834–836.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bettmann M. 2009. Choosing a research project and a research mentor. Circulation. 119:1832–1835.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhartiya S, Ichhpujani P. 2013. How to choose a mentor? J Curr Glaucoma Pract. 7:128–129.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bordage G. 2001. Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: the strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. Acad Med. 76:889–896.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bramer WM, Milic J, Mast F. 2017. Reviewing retrieved references for inclusion in systematic reviews using endnote. J Med Libr Assoc. 105:84–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brancati FL, Mead LA, Levine DM, Martin D, Margolis S, Klag MJ. 1992. Early predictors of career achievement in academic medicine. JAMA. 267:1372–1376.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnham EL, Fleming M. 2011. Selection of research mentors for K-funded scholars. Clin Transl Sci. 4:87–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology. 2013. Edinburgh (Scotland): The University of Edinburgh; [accessed 2017 Nov 23]. http://www.ccace.ed.ac.uk/research/software-resources/systematic-reviews-and-meta-analyses.
   Google Scholar
• Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. PROSPERO: International prospective register of systematic reviews. York (UK): University of York; [accessed 2017 Nov 25]. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.
   Google Scholar
• Chien PF, Khan KS, Siassakos D. 2012. Registration of systematic reviews: PROSPERO. BJOG. 119:903–905.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke M. 2004. Doing new research? Don’t forget the old. PLoS Med. 1:e35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• [Cochrane EPOC] Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Review Group. Data Collection Checklist. 1998. Ottawa (Canada): Cochrane EPOC Review Group; [accessed 2017 Nov 24]. http://methods.cochrane.org/sites/methods.cochrane.org.bias/files/public/uploads/EPOC%20Data%20Collection%20Checklist.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Cook DJ, Sackett DL, Spitzer WO. 1995. Methodologic guidelines for systematic reviews of randomized control trials in health care from the Potsdam Consultation on Meta-Analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 48:167–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke A, Smith D, Booth A. 2012. Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Health Res. 22:1435–1443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper ID, Crum JA. 2013. New activities and changing roles of health sciences librarians: a systematic review, 1990–2012. J Med Libr Assoc. 101:268–277.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cullis PS, Gudlaugsdottir K, Andrews J. 2017. A systematic review of the quality of conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric surgery. PLoS One. 12:e0175213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Densen P. 2011. Challenges and opportunities facing medical education. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 122:48–58.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dziak K, Anderson R, Sevick MA, Weisman CS, Levine DW, Scholle SH. 2005. Variations among institutional review board reviews in a multisite health services research study. Health Serv Res. 40:279–290.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW. 1997. Evidence-based approach to the medical literature. J Gen Intern Med. 12(Suppl 2):S5–S14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frishman WH. 2001. Student research projects and theses: should they be a requirement for medical school graduation? Heart Dis. 3:140–144.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gasparyan AY, Yessirkepov M, Voronov AA, Trukhachev VI, Kostyukova EI, Gerasimov AN, Kitas GD. 2016. Specialist bibliographic databases. J Korean Med Sci. 31:660–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilmour R, Cobus-Kuo L. 2011. Reference Management Software: a Comparative Analysis of Four Products. Ithaca (NY): Ithaca College.
   Google Scholar
• Gülpınar Ö, Güçlü AG. 2013. How to write a review article? Turk J Urol. 39:44–48.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hardman TC, Serginson JM. 2017. Ready! Aim! Fire! Targeting the right medical science journal. Cardiovasc Endocrinol. 6:95–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris MR. 2005. The librarian’s roles in the systematic review process: a case study. J Med Libr Assoc. 93:81–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houlden RL, Raja JB, Collier CP, Clark AF, Waugh JM. 2004. Medical students’ perceptions of an undergraduate research elective. Med Teach. 26:659–661.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang X, Lin J, Demner-Fushman D. 2006. Evaluation of PICO as a knowledge representation for clinical questions. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006:359–363.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• [IOM] Institute of Medicine. 2011. Standards for initiating a systematic review. In: Eden J, Levit L, Berg A, Morton S, editors. Finding what works in health care: Standards for systematic reviews. Washington (DC): The National Academies Press; p. 45–80.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson N, Waters E. 2004. The challenges of systematically reviewing public health interventions. J Public Health. 26:303–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs CD, Cross PC. 1995. The value of medical student research: the experience at Stanford University School of Medicine. Med Educ. 29:342–346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ. 1996. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 17:1–12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jones ML. 2004. Application of systematic review methods to qualitative research: practical issues. J Adv Nurs. 48:271–278.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapoor S, Sikka P, Saxena K. 2013. Publication of research article: an art or science? Ann Med Health Sci Res. 3:96–98.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kjeldsen K. 2006. A proficient mentor is a must when starting up with research. Exp Clin Cardiol. 11:243–245.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D. 2009. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 339:b2700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacDonald NE, Ford-Jones L, Friedman JN, Hall J. 2006. Preparing a manuscript for publication: a user-friendly guide. Paediatr Child Health. 11:339–342.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McDonagh M, Peterson K, Raina P, Chang S, Shekelle P. 2013. Avoiding bias in selecting studies. Methods guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); [accessed 23 Nov 2017]. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK126701/.
   Google Scholar
• Metcalfe D. 2008. Involving medical students in research. J R Soc Med. 101:102–103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Methley AM, Campbell S, Chew-Graham C, McNally R, Cheraghi-Sohi S. 2014. PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: a comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews. BMC Health Serv Res.14:579.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moat KA, Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Rottingen JA, Barnighausen T. 2013. Twelve myths about systematic reviews for health system policymaking rebutted. J Health Serv Res Policy. 18:44–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okoli C. 2015. A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Review. CAIS. 37:879–910.
   Google Scholar
• Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH. 1994. Users guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 272:1367–1371.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell BJ, McMillen JC, Proctor EK, Carpenter CR, Griffey RT, Bunger AC, Glass JE, York JL. 2012. A compilation of strategies for implementing clinical innovations in health and mental health. Med Care Res Rev. 69:123–157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PRISMA. 2015. Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. 2015. [accessed 2017 Nov 23]. http://www.prisma-statement.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Saint S, Christakis DA, Saha S, Elmore JG, Welsh DE, Baker P, Koepsell TD. 2000. Journal reading habits of internists. J Gen Intern Med. 15:881–884.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandelowski M. 2008. Reading, writing and systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 64:104–110.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders J. 2002. Research ethics committees-time for change? – Clin Med. 2:534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma R, Gordon M, Dharamsi S, Gibbs T. 2015. Systematic reviews in medical education: a practical approach: AMEE guide 94. Med Teach. 37:108–124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith V, Devane D, Begley CM, Clarke M. 2011. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol. 11:15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith AF, Carlisle J. 2015. Reviews, systematic reviews and anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 70:644–650.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silberman G, Kahn KL. 2011. Burdens on research imposed by institutional review boards: the state of the evidence and its implications for regulatory reform. Milbank Q. 89:599–627.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sungur MO, Seyhan T. 2013. Writing references and using citation management software. Turk J Urol. 39(Suppl 1):25–32.
   Google Scholar
• Swingler GH, Volmink J, Ioannidis JPA. 2003. Number of published systematic reviews and global burden of disease: database analysis. BMJ. 327:1083–1084.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uttley L, Montgomery P. 2017. The influence of the team in conducting a systematic review. Syst Rev. 6:149.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whiting LS. 2009. Systematic review protocols: an introduction. Nurse Res. 17:34–43.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar