230 likes | 378 Views
Using UW MSKTC Systematic Review Tools & Database: Tools for successful project management, data collection, and extraction. Model Systems Knowledge Translation Center University of Washington. MSKTC Steps in Conducting a Systematic Review.
E N D
Using UW MSKTC Systematic Review Tools & Database:Tools for successful project management, data collection, and extraction Model Systems Knowledge Translation Center University of Washington
Develop a Good Clinical QuestionDo a quick Scan of the Literature To write a good clinical question, you should ask yourself • Why am I conducting the review? • What do I hope to learn? • Who is this information for? • Consumers, clinicians, researchers, others • Is there enough relevant literature? • Finding enough disability specific research can be a challenge. Conducting a quick scan in the beginning is helpful.
Create a Plan Conduct your literature search Your development plan should include: • Your clinical question • Criteria for the literature search • Key words & Databases • Dates to include (how far back do you go?) • Inclusion and exclusion criteria • A timeline for your project • Possible journals to publish in • Strategies to manage the project
Using PBworks (WIKI) for project management • Platform for long-term project management • Allows for sharing of resources • Organizes documents
Categorize for Inclusion • You have a complete plan and you have a list of articles (from a library search), what is next? • Time to decide which articles meet your inclusion criteria in your plan • How do you decide which articles should be included? • MSKTC uses a “categorization” tool/system to include & exclude articles. • Helps to track & documents the article inclusion process
Sample: Inclusion Categorization System 1 Any article that includes children under age 18, will be flagged in the endnote database with the keyword “child” in the comment field (Custom 6) 2 includes both tetraplegia and paraplegia, and those with complete and incomplete injuries (NOT MS or spinal cord disease)
Implementing the Categorization • MSKTC uses Endnote to read article abstracts • Input the inclusion category as (1-5 or “no”) in the research notes field • Excluded Reason (“no”) category are input in the Label field • Could use other Citation System • Excel & Access • Main goal is to track why all potential articles are included and excluded from the review
Sample: Systematic Review Flow Chart Categorization Process Data Extraction
Next Steps: Data Extraction We’ve narrowed down the list of articles by categorizing them so what is next? • Data Extraction • Create Tables of Evidence
MSKTC Systematic Review Database • Designed to improve the efficiency of systematic reviews • Designed for use in disability research and by Model Systems (allows for the collection of data specific to SCI, TBI, and Burns) • Not limited to a specific evidence grading tool • Allows for collection of more detailed data—including measurement data • Web-based so easy to use by anyone with web access & data can be entered simultaneously by many users • Allows for custom reports & Table of Evidence generation • Allows for less costly & more efficient customizations—than normal web-based development
MSKTC Systematic Review Database: Research Design • Practical tool for deciding on research design • Research Design Decision Tree
MSKTC Database Tour • Take a look at the database & give brief tour • http://sra.msktc.washington.edu/user.php
Future Plans for MSKTC Database • Improved reference/citation importing • Standard reports available in real-time on the site (click a button get a report) • Getting the system set-up for a pilot test on the Women with SCI systematic review • All authors and research assistants will be extracting data together. • Pilot test will help us get input on finalizing the system and reports needed.
For More Information • Elamin, M.B. Choice of data extraction tools for systematic reviews depends on resources and review complexity (http://pubget.com/search?q=latest%3AJournal+of+Clinical+Epidemiology&from=16168344). • Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials: the QUOROM statement checklist http://www.consort-statement.org/mod_product/uploads/QUOROM%20checklist%20and%20flow%20diagram%201999.pdf) • Lewin, S. SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health Policymaking (STP) 8: Deciding how much confidence to place in a systematic review (http://www.health-policy-systems.com/content/7/S1/S8) • American Academy of Neurology (AAN) Clinical Practice Guideline Process Manual (http://www.aan.com/globals/axon/assets/3749.pdf)