TEMPLATE - REVIEWS
Table of contents
After writing, please delete instructions highlighted in blue and all sample text. Please retain all headings in bolded and capital letters.
<Citation, please follow this example> e.g. Brown, C. 2008 Feb 21. Article title. Mobile medical computing reviews. [Online] 2:1
<Abstract:>The first sentence should summarise the clinical question that the review addresses e.g. "Are PDAs better than pen and paper for recording patient-reported outcomes in clinical research?". The second sentence should accurately state the results, e.g. "PDAs were found to have better compliance and fewer errors in most of the nine studies.". The final sentence should tell the learning points, with any relevant caveats, e.g. "All studies reported technical difficulties with the PDAs". You must stick to these three sentences and use fewer than 150 words. For everything you write do _not_copy entire sentences - you must rephrase it (for copyright reasons) and summarize it (to save the reader time).
<Article title here. Please follow the capitalization at the top of this page. Please hyperlink it to the PubMed record with the URL http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/pubmed/ followed by the PMID number) e.g. Evaluation of an application for making palmtop computers accessible to individuals with intellectual disabilities
<Article citation details. From the PubMed record, copy the author names, the journal title, and all the publication details>e.g. Dale O, Hagen KB. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Jan;60(1):8-17.
Reviewed by [enter your name here]
<Optional sentence> set the stage for interpretation, i.e. is the technology discussed in this review the focus of the study, or was it simply an aspect or tool of a different type of research project?
Research design/methodology
What was the review methodology, e.g. Review, Systematic review, or Meta-analysis, and how many articles were reviewed? E.g. "Meta-analysis of nine clinical trials."
Eligibility criteria
Give an overview (not a detailed listing) of the types of studies, participants, comparisons, outcome measures in the selected articles. Explicit methods limit bias in identifying and rejecting studies, so highlight whether or not they have been used. E.g. for this paper, write "Included randomized trials or systematic reviews of randomized trials: extracted relevant data; included intervention group that used a handheld EMR and a control group that was either a desktop EMR or the paper chart; users of the handheld EMR were clinicians; and the outcomes had to be relevant to clinical care.".
Search methodology
E.g. how did they find the articles (hand searching, grey literature, databases, etc.)? Which databases searched? The years that were searched? Briefly describe the search query. What was the nature of the literature reviewed? E.g. American, English-speaking, environment (academic/hospital)? You can do this in prose or bullet points.
Intervention
E.g. Pocket Voyager, a simplified multimedia software system for palmtop computers, was designed for individuals with intellectual disabilities with the aim of making palmtop computers less complex and more accessible.
Technologies
List all the hardware and software covered in the review, on both PDAs and PCs. If able, please include clickable URL hotlinks - not necessary for broad ideas such as "Palm" or "PocketPC" but Joe-Bob's Data Analysis Package might be good, also If version numbers are given, include them too. E.g. "Pocket PCs with Epocrates", "Server software designed with Satellite Forms", etc.
Outcome
HIGHLIGHTS: key findings of the study.
IMPLICATIONS: application of results to patient care. Examples of this include a decrease in errors, improved review of information, improved ordering of medications or tests, improved documentation or improved satisfaction.
GENERALIZABILITY: of literature retrieved (or were they niche-specific) e.g. "This meta-analysis is generalizable to other technologies or disabilities."
CONSISTENCY: of research articles (homogeneous or heterogeneous findings).
- Tag page
-
- What links here
Images 0
Everything on this wiki is available for reuse through the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States Licence.
- to Share — to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
- to Remix — to make derivative works
Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).