Pub Date : 2024-08-06DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112798
Farhad Shokraneh
{"title":"Stop searching and you will find it: Search-Resistant Concepts in systematic review searches.","authors":"Farhad Shokraneh","doi":"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112798","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112798","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":9059,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141896731","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-30DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2024-113103
Samuel James Tingle, Georgios Kourounis, Felix Liu, Colin H Wilson, Rachel Richardson, Josie Sandercock
{"title":"Simple tool implementing Bucher's method for indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analyses.","authors":"Samuel James Tingle, Georgios Kourounis, Felix Liu, Colin H Wilson, Rachel Richardson, Josie Sandercock","doi":"10.1136/bmjebm-2024-113103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjebm-2024-113103","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":9059,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141854719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-23DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112352
Sietse Wieringa, Hugh McGuire, Qi Wang, Philip van der Wees, Beth Shaw
{"title":"Making sustainable healthcare decisions: three turns towards sustainable guidelines.","authors":"Sietse Wieringa, Hugh McGuire, Qi Wang, Philip van der Wees, Beth Shaw","doi":"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112352","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112352","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":9059,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"219-222"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11287642/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41190867","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-23DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112271
Jeremy M Grimshaw, Wendy Levinson
{"title":"Reducing low value care: opportunities and challenges for Choosing Wisely campaigns.","authors":"Jeremy M Grimshaw, Wendy Levinson","doi":"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112271","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112271","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":9059,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"215-218"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10069948","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-23DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2022-112126
Patricia Logullo, Jennifer A de Beyer, Shona Kirtley, Michael Maia Schlüssel, Gary S Collins
{"title":"Open access journal publication in health and medical research and open science: benefits, challenges and limitations.","authors":"Patricia Logullo, Jennifer A de Beyer, Shona Kirtley, Michael Maia Schlüssel, Gary S Collins","doi":"10.1136/bmjebm-2022-112126","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjebm-2022-112126","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":9059,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"223-228"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11287529/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41124018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-23DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112647
Małgorzata M Bała, Tina Poklepović Peričić, Marija Franka Žuljević, Nensi Bralić, Joanna Zając, Nkengafac Villyen Motaze, Anke Rohwer, Michalina Gajdzica, Taryn Young
<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objectives of this study are to assess reporting of evidence-based healthcare (EBHC) e-learning interventions using the Guideline for Reporting Evidence-based practice Educational interventions and Teaching (GREET) checklist and explore factors associated with compliant reporting.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Methodological cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Based on the criteria used in an earlier systematic review, we included studies comparing EBHC e-learning and any other form of EBHC training or no EBHC training. We searched Medline, Embase, ERIC, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, Web of Knowledge, PsycInfo, ProQuest and Best Evidence Medical Education up to 4 January 2023. Screening of titles, abstracts, full-text articles and data extraction was done independently by two authors. For each study, we assessed adherence to each of the 17 GREET items and extracted information on possible predictors. Adequacy of reporting for each item of the GREET checklist was judged with yes (provided complete information), no (provided no information), unclear (when insufficient information was provided), or not applicable, when the item was clearly of no relevance to the intervention described (such as for item 8-details about the instructors-in the studies which used electronic, self-paced intervention, without any tutoring). Studies' adherence to the GREET checklist was presented as percentages and absolute numbers. We performed univariate analysis to assess the association of potential adherence predictors with the GREET checklist. We summarised results descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 40 studies, the majority of which assessed e-learning or blended learning and mostly involved medical and other healthcare students. None of the studies fully reported all the GREET items. Overall, the median number of GREET items met (received yes) per study was 8 and third quartile (Q3) of GREET items met per study was 9 (min. 4 max. 14). When we used Q3 of the number of items met as cut-off point, adherence to the GREET reporting checklist was poor with 7 out of 40 studies (17.5%) reporting items of the checklist on acceptable level (adhered to at least 10 items out of 17). None of the studies reported on all 17 GREET items. For 3 items, 80% of included studies well reported information (received yes for these items): item 1 (brief description of intervention), item 4 (evidence-based practice content) and item 6 (educational strategies). Items for which 50% of included studies reported complete information (received yes for these items) included: item 9 (modes of delivery), item 11 (schedule) and 12 (time spent on learning). The items for which 70% or more of included studies did not provide information (received no for these items) included: item 7 (incentives) and item 13 (adaptations; for both items 70% of studies received no for them), item 14 (modifications of educational interventions-95%
{"title":"Adherence to the Guideline for Reporting Evidence-based practice Educational interventions and Teaching (GREET) of studies on evidence-based healthcare e-learning: a cross-sectional study.","authors":"Małgorzata M Bała, Tina Poklepović Peričić, Marija Franka Žuljević, Nensi Bralić, Joanna Zając, Nkengafac Villyen Motaze, Anke Rohwer, Michalina Gajdzica, Taryn Young","doi":"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112647","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112647","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objectives of this study are to assess reporting of evidence-based healthcare (EBHC) e-learning interventions using the Guideline for Reporting Evidence-based practice Educational interventions and Teaching (GREET) checklist and explore factors associated with compliant reporting.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Methodological cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Based on the criteria used in an earlier systematic review, we included studies comparing EBHC e-learning and any other form of EBHC training or no EBHC training. We searched Medline, Embase, ERIC, CINAHL, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, Web of Knowledge, PsycInfo, ProQuest and Best Evidence Medical Education up to 4 January 2023. Screening of titles, abstracts, full-text articles and data extraction was done independently by two authors. For each study, we assessed adherence to each of the 17 GREET items and extracted information on possible predictors. Adequacy of reporting for each item of the GREET checklist was judged with yes (provided complete information), no (provided no information), unclear (when insufficient information was provided), or not applicable, when the item was clearly of no relevance to the intervention described (such as for item 8-details about the instructors-in the studies which used electronic, self-paced intervention, without any tutoring). Studies' adherence to the GREET checklist was presented as percentages and absolute numbers. We performed univariate analysis to assess the association of potential adherence predictors with the GREET checklist. We summarised results descriptively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 40 studies, the majority of which assessed e-learning or blended learning and mostly involved medical and other healthcare students. None of the studies fully reported all the GREET items. Overall, the median number of GREET items met (received yes) per study was 8 and third quartile (Q3) of GREET items met per study was 9 (min. 4 max. 14). When we used Q3 of the number of items met as cut-off point, adherence to the GREET reporting checklist was poor with 7 out of 40 studies (17.5%) reporting items of the checklist on acceptable level (adhered to at least 10 items out of 17). None of the studies reported on all 17 GREET items. For 3 items, 80% of included studies well reported information (received yes for these items): item 1 (brief description of intervention), item 4 (evidence-based practice content) and item 6 (educational strategies). Items for which 50% of included studies reported complete information (received yes for these items) included: item 9 (modes of delivery), item 11 (schedule) and 12 (time spent on learning). The items for which 70% or more of included studies did not provide information (received no for these items) included: item 7 (incentives) and item 13 (adaptations; for both items 70% of studies received no for them), item 14 (modifications of educational interventions-95% ","PeriodicalId":9059,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"229-238"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141305388","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-23DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112530
Lisa Affengruber, Barbara Nussbaumer-Streit, Candyce Hamel, Miriam Van der Maten, James Thomas, Chris Mavergames, Rene Spijker, Gerald Gartlehner
This paper is part of a series of methodological guidance from the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group. Rapid reviews (RRs) use modified systematic review methods to accelerate the review process while maintaining systematic, transparent and reproducible methods. This paper guides how to use supportive software for RRs.We strongly encourage the use of supportive software throughout RR production. Specifically, we recommend (1) using collaborative online platforms that enable working in parallel, allow for real-time project management and centralise review details; (2) using automation software to support, but not entirely replace a human reviewer and human judgement and (3) being transparent in reporting the methodology and potential risk for bias due to the use of supportive software.
{"title":"Rapid review methods series: Guidance on the use of supportive software.","authors":"Lisa Affengruber, Barbara Nussbaumer-Streit, Candyce Hamel, Miriam Van der Maten, James Thomas, Chris Mavergames, Rene Spijker, Gerald Gartlehner","doi":"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112530","DOIUrl":"10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112530","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper is part of a series of methodological guidance from the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group. Rapid reviews (RRs) use modified systematic review methods to accelerate the review process while maintaining systematic, transparent and reproducible methods. This paper guides how to use supportive software for RRs.We strongly encourage the use of supportive software throughout RR production. Specifically, we recommend (1) using collaborative online platforms that enable working in parallel, allow for real-time project management and centralise review details; (2) using automation software to support, but not entirely replace a human reviewer and human judgement and (3) being transparent in reporting the methodology and potential risk for bias due to the use of supportive software.</p>","PeriodicalId":9059,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"264-271"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11287527/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139502243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：