Twelve tips for undertaking a focused systematic review in medical education

References

• Al-Sheikh YT, Millington J, Andrade JD. 2009. Information technology. Visualizing multi-analytical clinical chemistry data via simple patterns. Lab Med. 40:15–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartolucci AA, Hillegas WB. 2010. Overview, strengths and limitations of systematic reviews and metal-analysis. In: Chiapelli, editor. Evidence-based practice: towards optmising clinical outcomes. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; p. 17–33.
   Google Scholar
• Best Evidence Medical Education. 2018a. A BEME review: definition and description. BEME. Available from: https://www.bemecollaboration.org/What+is+a+BEME+Review/.
   Google Scholar
• Best Evidence Medical Education. 2018b. A Guide to Writing and Submitting a BEME Review Protocol. Available from: https://www.bemecollaboration.org/Step +4+Protocol+Preparation/
   Google Scholar
• Biondi-Zoccai G, Lotrionte M, Landoni G, Modena MG. 2011. The rough guide to systematic reviews and meta-analyses. HSR Proc Intensive Care Cardiovasc Anesth. 3:161–173.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bravata DM, Shojania KG, Olkin I, Raveh A. 2008. CoPlot: a tool for visualizing multivariate data in medicine. Stat Med. 27:2234–2247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brooks D, McNeel M. 2013. The importance of transparent reporting of systematic reviews. Physiotherapy Canada. 65:1–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carney PA, Palmer RT, Fuqua Miller M, Thayer EK, Estroff SE, Litzelman DK, Biagioli FE, Teal CR, Lambros A, Hatt WJ, et al. 2016. Tools to assess behavioural and social science competencies in medical education: a systematic review. Acad Med. 91:730–742.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. 2018. Welcome to PROSPERO: international prospective register of systematic reviews. UK: University of Yor. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/
   Google Scholar
• Darbyshire D, Gordon M, Baker P, Agius S, McAleer S. 2018. Systematic review of interventions to encourage careers in academic medicine. Med Teach. 28. DOI:10.1080/0142159X.2018.1438590
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daya Z, Hearn JH. 2018. Mindfulness interventions in medical education: a systematic review of their impact on medical student stress, depression, fatigue and burnout. Med Teach. 40:146–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deng Y, Denecke K. 2014. Visualizing Unstructured Patient Data for Assessing Diagnostic and Therapeutic History. e-Health – For Continuity of Care. 205:1158–1162.
   Google Scholar
• Egger M, Dickersin K, Smith P. 2001. Problems and limitations in conducting systematic reviews. In: Egger M, Dickersin K, Smith P, editors. Systematic reviews in healthcare education. London: BMJ Books; p. 43–68.
   Google Scholar
• Federer L. 2013. The librarian as research informationist: a case study. J Med Libr Assoc. 101:298–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feilchenfeld Z, Dornan T, Whitehead C, Kuper A. 2017. Ultrasound in undergraduate medical education: a systematic and critical review. Med Educ. 51:366–378.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finch E, Lethlean J, Rose T, Fleming J, Theodoros D, Cameron A, Coleman A, Copland D, McPhail SM. 2018. How does feedback from patients impact upon healthcare student clinical skill development and learning? a systematic review. Med Teach. 40:244–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganann R, Ciliska D, Thomas H. 2010. Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews. Implement Sci. 5:56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gill CJ, Bachman DeSilva M, Hamer DH, Keyi X, Wilson IB, Sabi L. 2015. Novel approaches for visualizing and analyzing dose-timing data from electronic drug monitors, or; how the 'broken window' theory pertains to ART adherence. AIDS Behav. 19:2057–2068.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gopalakrishnan S, Ganeshkumar P. 2013. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis: understanding the best evidence in primary healthcare. J Family Med Prim Care. 2:9–14.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gordon M, Hill E, Stojan J, Daniels M. 2018. Educational interventions to improve handover in healthcare: an update systematic review. Acad Med. 93:1234–1244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greyson D, Surette S, Dennett L, Chatterley T. 2013. You’re just one of the group when you’re embedded: report from a mixed-method investigation of the research-embedded health librarian experience. J Med Libr Assoc. 101:287–297.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemmelmann C, Ziegler A. 2011. Strengths and limitations of systematic reviews of drug trials: the biostatistical perspective. ENJ. 3:67–73.
   Google Scholar
• Holst R, Funk CJ, Adams HS, Bandy M, Boss CM, Hill B, Joseph CB, Lett RK. 2009. Vital pathways for hospital librarians: present and future roles. J Med Libr Assoc. 97:285–292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Homan JM. 2010. Eyes on the prize: reflections on the impact of the evolving digital ecology on the librarian an expert intermediary and knowledge coach, 1969 - 2009. J Med Libr Assoc. 98:49–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jahan N, Naveed S, Zeshan M, Tahi MA. 2016. How to conduct a systematic review: a narrative literature review. Cureus. 8:e864.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamal N, Smith EE, Stephenson C, Choi PMC, Goyal M, Hill MD. 2015. Visualizing acute stroke data to improve clinical outcomes. Stroke. 46:e170–e172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplonyi J, Bowles K-A, Nestel D, Kiegaldie D, Maloney S, Haines T, Williams C. 2017. Understanding the impact of simulated patients on healthcare learner’s communication skills: a systematic review. Med Educ. 51:1209–1219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klem M, Saghafi E, Abromitis R, Stover A, Dew MA, Pilkonis P. 2009. Building PROMIS item banks: librarians as co-investigators. Qual Life Res. 18:881–888.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorinkova NM, Perry SJ. 2017. When is empowerment effective? The role of leader-leader exchange in empowering leadership, cynicism, and time theft. J Manage. 43:1631–1654.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacGill M. 2016. What is a systematic review in research? Medical News Today. Available from: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/281283.php
   Google Scholar
• Mallett R, Hagen-Zanker J, Slater R, Duvendack M. 2012. The benefits and challenges of using systematic reviews in international development research. J Dev Effect. 4:445–455.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marshall JG, Sollenberger J, Easterby-Gannett S, Morgan LK, Klem ML, Cavanaugh SK, Oliver KB, Thompson CA, Romanosky N, Hunter S. 2013. The value of library and information services in patient care: results of a multisite study. J Med Libr Assoc. 101:38–46.
   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
• Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA. PRISMA-P Group. 2015. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 4:3–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and Research Design Services Yorkshire and the Humber (RDS). 2018. Scoping searches. Available from: https://www.rds-yh.nihr.ac.uk/scoping-searchesfunding-update/
   Google Scholar
• Patrício MF, Julião M, Fareleira F, Carneiro AV. 2013. Is the OSCE a feasible tool to assess competencies in undergraduate medical education?. Med Teach. 35:503–514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson J, Pearce P, Ferguson L, Langford C. 2017. Understanding scoping reviews: definition, purpose and process. J Am Ass Nurs Pract. 29:12–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petticrew M, Roberts H. 2006. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Reimschisel T, Herring AL, Huang J, Minor TJ. 2017. A systematic review of the published literature on team-based learning in health professions education. Med Teach. 39:1227–1237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson K, Akinyede O, Dutta T, Sawin VI, Li T, Spencer MR, Turkelson CM, Weston C. 2013. Framework for determining research gaps during systematic review evaluation. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), Effective Healthcare Program. Research Methods Report no. 13-EHC019-EF. Available from: www.effectivehealthcare.hrq.gov
   Google Scholar
• Rogers S. 2010. Florence Nightingale datajournalist: information has always been beautiful. The Guardian website: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/aug/13/florence-nightingale-graphics. Accessed 3rd April 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers S. 2013. John Snow's data journalism: the cholera map that changed the world. The Guardian website [accessed 2018 Apr 3]. http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/mar/15/john-snow-cholera-map.
   Google Scholar
• Shneiderman B, Plaisant C, Hesse BW. 2013. Improving healthcare with interactive visualization. Computer. 46:58–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith V, Devane D, Begley CM, Clarke M. 2011. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol. 11:15–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swingler G, Volmink J, Ioannidis J. 2003. Number of published systematic reviews and global burden of disease: database analysis. BMJ. 327:1083–1084.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• University of Toledo. 2018. Conducting a systematic review: a process overview. Libr Guide. Available from: http://libguides.utoledo.edu/sysrev/collaboration#s-lg-box-11153204
   Google Scholar
• Uttley L, Montgomery P. 2017. The influence of the team in conducting a systematic review. Syst Rev. 6:149–152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaitsis C, Nilsson G, Zary N. 2014. Visual analytics in healthcare education: exploring novel ways to analyze and represent big data in undergraduate medical education. PeerJ. 2:e683.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Knaap LM, Leeuw FL, Bogaerts S, Nijssen LTJ. 2008. Combining campbell standard and the realist evaluation approach: the best of two worlds?. Am J Eval. 29:48–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitehouse K, Moore A, Cooper N. 2017. How do national specialty groups develop undergraduate guidelines for medical schools, and which are successful? A systematic review. Med Teach. 39:1138–1144.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. 2013. Rameses publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med. 11:21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu YQ, Chen HG. 2015. Empowering leadership in R&D teams: a closer look at its components, process, and outcomes. R D Manage. 46:726–735.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar