Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- jnl:harris2014_systematic_review_writing [2021/07/25 12:15]
admin [Getting Started]
+++ jnl:harris2014_systematic_review_writing [2021/08/28 13:11] (current)
admin [See also]
@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
     * systematic review: a priori questions
     * meta-analysis: statistical methods ΓÇô> forest plot; "mathematical assimilation of studies"
-    * QUORUM (Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses) -> PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses)
+    * QUORUM (Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses) -> [[http://www.prisma-statement.org/|PRISMA]] (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses)
-    * EQUATOR (Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Care Research)
+    * [[https://www.equator-network.org/|EQUATOR]] (Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Care Research)
 ==== Getting Started ====
+=== Before ===
   - **Check registries** to avoid duplication: e.g. PROSPERO
     * What does this review answer that previous ones did not?
   - Answer an **answerable question** - important, underreported
-    * balance between too broad and too narrow - use PICOS criteria (Participants, intervention, comparisons, outcomes, study design)
+    * balance between too broad and too narrow - use [[https://libguides.murdoch.edu.au/systematic/PICO|PICOS]] criteria (Participants, intervention, comparisons, outcomes, study design)
     * may need to adjust criteria e.g. hip replacement outcomes
+=== Determine eligibility and outcomes ===
   - Critical **evaluation of eligible studies** for "best available evidence"
     * Level 1 studies of course great, but not always available or possible e.g. compartment syndrome
   - primary **study outcomes** determined a priori
-  - **Search methodology** and documenting it in a PRISMA flowchart
+=== Search, collect and extract ===
+  - **Search methodology** and documenting it in a [[http://www.prisma-statement.org/|PRISMA]] flowchart
     * Besides MEDLINE/PubMed; EMbase, PEDro, Cochrane, CENTRAL, SciVerse SCopus, CINAHL, SPORTDIscus, Google Scholar
   - **Review lists**
   - **Extract data** from studies using checklists: CEBM, Cochrane collaboration ΓÇô> Excel
+=== Analyze, grade and summarize===
   - **Data analysis**:
     * beware heterogeneity
     * "eyeball test"; Cochrane Q test, index test or T2 test.
-  - **Grade evidence** and strength of recomendations (SORT - Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy, GRADE: Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation)
+  - **Grade evidence** and strength of recomendations ([[https://www.aafp.org/afp/2004/0201/p548.html|SORT]] - Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy, [[https://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/|GRADE]]: Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation)
   - AMSTAR (to grade systematic reviews); MECIR (Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews)
   - **Summarize** the take home message well
+==== See also ====
+  - [[https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n71 | 2020 PRISMA statement described in BMJ]]
+  - EQUATOR provides a lot of resources for research including a checklist for case reports[[https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/care/|CARE]]
 ==== Source ====
 Harris, J. D., Quatman, C. E., Manring, M. M., Siston, R. A., & Flanigan, D. C. (2014). How to Write a Systematic Review. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 42(11), 2761ΓÇô2768. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546513497567
 ==== Metadata ====

Alphonsus Chong's Personal Wiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools