Systematic reviews in medical education: A practical approach: AMEE Guide 94

References

• Altman DG. 1994. The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ 308:283–284
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bath PMW, Gray LJ. 2009. Systematic reviews as a tool for planning and interpreting trials. Int J Stroke 4(1):23–27
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bearman M, Dawson P. 2013. Qualitative synthesis and systematic review in health professions education. Med Educ 47:252–260
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME). 2014. [Accessed September 2014] Available from www.bemecollaboration.org
   Google Scholar
• Bigby M, Williams H. 2003. Appraising systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Arch Dermatol 139(6):795–798
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bligh DA. 2000. What's the use of lectures? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
   Google Scholar
• Burgers JS, Grol R, Klazinga NS, Makela M, Zaat J. 2003. Towards evidence-based clinical practice: An international survey of 18 clinical guideline programs. Int J Qual Healthc 15(1):31–45
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Campbell Collaboration. 2013. What is a systematic review? [Accessed 11 November 2013] Available from http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/what_is_a_systematic_review/index.php
   Google Scholar
• Carline JD. 2004. Funding medical education research: Opportunities and issues. Acad Med 79(10):918–924
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chalmers I, Glasziou P. 2009. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet 374:86–89
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen FM, Burstin H, Huntington J. 2005. The importance of clinical outcomes in medical education research. Med Educ 39(4):350–351
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cherry MG, Fletcher I, O’Sullivan H, Shaw N. 2012. What impact do structured educational sessions to increase emotional intelligence have on medical students? BEME Guide No. 17. Med Teach 34(1):11–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke M, Hopewell S, Chalmers I. 2010. Clinical trials should begin and end with systematic reviews of relevant evidence: 12 Years and waiting. Lancet 376(9734):20–21
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cochrane Collaboration. 2013. Cochrane reviews. [Accessed 11 November 2013] Available from http://www.cochrane.org/cochrane-reviews
   Google Scholar
• Cook DA, Bordage G, Schmidt H. 2008. Description, justification, and clarification: A framework for classifying the purposes of research in medical education. Med Educ 42:128–133
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook DA, West CP. 2012. Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: A stepwise approach. Med Educ 46(10):943–952
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cresswell J, Klassen AC, Clark VLP, Smith KC. 2010. Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. [Accessed 14th October 2013] Available from http://obssr.od.nih.gov/mixed_methods_research/pdf/Best_Practices_for_Mixed_Methods_Research.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Crowley P, Chalmers I, Keirse MJ. 1990. The effects of corticosteroid administration before pre-term delivery: An overview of the evidence from controlled trials. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 97:11–25
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Crowther MA, Cook DJ. 2007. Trials and tribulations of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Prog 2007:493–497
   Google Scholar
• Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B, Sutton A. 2005. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods. J Health Serv Res Policy 10(1):45–53
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Doshi P, Jones S, Jefferson T. 2012. Rethinking credible evidence synthesis. BMJ 344:d7898
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Drabkin I. 1957. Medical education in ancient Greece and Rome. J Med Educ 32(4):286–296
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Evans D. 1999. Conducting a systematic review. Adelaide, Australia: The Joanna Briggs Institute for Evidence Based Nursing and Midwifery. pp 1–40
   Google Scholar
• Evidence-Based Behavioral Practice. 2013. Systematic review module: Introduction to systematic reviews. [Accessed 11 November 2013] Available from http://www.ebbp.org/training.html
   Google Scholar
• French SD, McDonald S, McKenzie JE, Green SE. 2005. Investing in updating: How do conclusions change when Cochrane systematic reviews are updated? BMC Med Res Methodol 5(1):33
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gordon M. 2014. Developing healthcare non-technical skills training through educational innovation and synthesis of education research. [Accessed 1 October 2014] Available from http://usir.salford.ac.uk/30826/1/M_GORDON_THESIS_FINAL_AMMENDED_FULL_SUBMISSION.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Gordon M, Darbyshire D, Baker P. 2012. Educational interventions to improve patient safety: A systematic review. Med Educ 46:1042–1054
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon M, Darbyshire D, Baker P. 2013a. Separating the wheat from the Chaff. Systematic review in medical education. Med Educ 47(6):632
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon M, Darbyshire D, Saifuddin A, Vimalesvaran K. 2013b. Limitations of poster presentations reporting educational innovations at a major international medical education conference. Med Educ Online 18. doi:10.3402/meo.v18i0.20498
   Google Scholar
• Gordon M, Gibbs T. 2014. STORIES statement Publication standards for health care education evidence synthesis. BMC Med 12:143
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon M, Vaz Carneiro A, Patricio M, Gibbs T. 2014. Missed opportunities in health care education evidence synthesis. Med Educ 48:644–645
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenhalgh T, Peacock R. 2005. Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: Audit of primary sources. BMJ (Clin Res Ed.) 331(7524):1064–1065
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O, Peacock R. 2005. Storylines of research in diffusion of innovation: A meta-narrative approach to systematic review. Soc Sci Med 61(2):417–430
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gutiérrez Castrellón P, Polanco Allué I, Salazar Lindo E. 2010. An evidence based Iberic-Latin guideline for acute gastroenteritis management in infants and prescholars [Article in Spanish]. An Pediatr (Barc) 72(3):220.e1–220.e20
   Google Scholar
• Haig A, Dozier M. 2003a. BEME Guide No 3: Systematic searching for evidence in medical education – Part 1: Sources of information. Med Teach 25:352–363
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haig A, Dozier M. 2003b. BEME Guide No 3: Systematic searching for evidence in medical education – Part 2: Constructing searches. Med Teach 25:463–484
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall JC, Platell C. 1997. Half life of truth in surgical literature. Lancet 350(9093):1752
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hammick M, Dornan T, Steinhart Y. 2010. Conducting a best evidence systematic review. Part 1: From idea to data coding. BEME Guide No. 13. Med Teach 32(1):3–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harden R, Grant J, Buckley G, Hart IR. 1999. Best evidence medical education. BEME Guide No. 1. Med Teach 21(6):553–562
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffmann TC, Erueti C, Glasziou PP. 2013. Poor description of non-pharmacological interventions: Analysis of consecutive sample of randomised trials. BMJ 347:f3755
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, Antes G. 2003. Five steps to conducting a systematic review. J R Soc Med 96(3):118–121
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkpatrick JD, Kirkpatrick WK. 2009. Then and now: A strong foundation for the future. St Louis, MO: Kirkpatrick Partners
   Google Scholar
• Lang TA. 2004. The value of systematic reviews as research activities in medical education. Acad Med 79(11):1067–1072
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, 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
• Magarey JM. 2001. Elements of a systematic review. Int J Nurs Pract 7(6):376–382
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mbuagbaw L, Wiysonge CS, Nsagha DS, Ongolo-Zogo P, Pantoja T. 2011. An introduction to systematic reviews and meta-analysis: A workshop report on promoting evidence based medical practice through capacity building in research synthesis. Pan Afr Med J 8(1):15
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McManus R, Wilson S, Delaney B. 1998. Review of the usefulness of contacting other experts when conducting a literature search for systematic reviews. BMJ 317:1562–1563
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meerpohl JJ, Herrle F, Antes G, Von Elm E. 2012. Scientific value of systematic reviews: Survey of editors of core clinical journals. PLoS One 7(5):e35732
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moher D, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, Tugwell P, Moher M, Jones A, Pham B, Klassen TP. 1999. Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials: Implications for the conduct of meta-analyses. Health Technol Assess 3(12):i–iv, 1–98
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco A, Sampson M, Altman D. 2006. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med 4:e78
   Google Scholar
• Moher D, Tsertsvadze A, Tricco A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J, Sampson M, Barrowman N. 2007. A systematic review identified few methods and strategies describing when and how to update systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 60(11):1095–1104
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morrison J. 2005. The challenges of systematic reviews of educational research. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 331(7513):391
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mulrow CD. 1987. The medical review article: State of the science. Ann Intern Med 106(3):485–488
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nasser M, Welch V. 2013. Prioritization of systematic reviews leads prioritization of research gaps and needs. J Clin Epidemiol 66(5):522–523
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Noblit GW, Hare RD. 1988. Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. London: Sage
   Google Scholar
• Norman G. 2003. RCT = results confounded and trivial: The perils of grand educational experiments. Med Educ 37:582–584
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsen O, Middleton P, Ezzo J, Gøtzsche PC, Hadhazy V, Herxheimer A, Kleijnen J, McIntosh H. 2001. Quality of Cochrane reviews: Assessment of sample from 1998. BMJ 323:829–832
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Patricio M, Vaz Careneiro A. 2012. Systematic reviews of evidence in medical education and clinical medicine: Is the nature of evidence similar? Med Teach 34:474–482
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petticrew M, Roberts H. 2005. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. London: Wiley-Blackwell
   Google Scholar
• Pitkin RM, Branagan MA, Burmeister LF. 1999. Accuracy of data in abstracts of published research articles. J Am Med Assoc 281(12):1110–1111
   Google Scholar
• Poynard T, Munteanu M, Ratziu V, Benhamou Y, Di Martino V, Taieb J, Opolon P. 2002. Truth survival in clinical research: An evidence-based requiem? Ann Intern Med 136(12):888–895
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roberts I, Schierhout G. 1997. The private life of systematic reviews. BMJ 315:686–687
   Google Scholar
• Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM. 1995. On the need for evidence-based medicine. J Public Health 17(3):330–334
   Google Scholar
• Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JAM, Richardson WS. 1996. Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn't. BMJ 312:71–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shactman N. 2000. Why doctors hate the Internet. Wired News. [Accessed 14 October 2013] Available from http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,35516.00.html
   Google Scholar
• Shojannia KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D. 2007. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Ann Intern Med 147(4):224–233
   PubMedGoogle 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(1):15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Social Science Research Unit. 2009. About EPPI centre. [Accessed 14 October 2013] Available from http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid=63
   Google Scholar
• Thomas J, Harden A, Oakley A, Oliver S, Sutcliffe K, Rees R, Kavanagh J. 2004. Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews. BMJ 328(7446):1010–1012
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thomas J, Harden A. 2008. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 8(1):45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todres M, Stephenson A, Jones R. 2007. Medical education research remains the poor relation. BMJ 335(7615):333–335
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trespidi C, Barbui C, Cipriani A. 2011. Why it is important to include unpublished data in systematic reviews. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 20(2):133–135
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• White H, Waddington H. 2012. Why do we care about evidence synthesis? An introduction to the special issue on systematic reviews. J Dev Eff 4(3):351–358
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhopr G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. 2013. RAMESES publication standards: Realist syntheses. BMC Med 11:21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yardley S, Dornan T. 2012. Kirkpatrick's levels and education ‘evidence’. Med Educ 46:97–106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yousefi-Nooraie R. 2009. Promoting development and use of systematic reviews in a developing country. J Eval Clin Pract 15(6):1029–1034
   PubMedGoogle Scholar