Type Your Title Here Author’s First Name Last Name, degree,…. Mentor’s First Name Last Name,...

Type Your Title Here Author’s First Name Last Name, degree,…. Mentor’s First Name Last Name, degree Dept. Name here, NYU Lutheran Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY Introduction Bullet point background information that establishes the importance of the topic. Identify rationale for your review and gaps in the literature that your review will fill. List the focused clinical questions to be addressed in your review as individual bullet points (if more than one) Methods Describe the study screening and selection criteria (inclusion/exclusion criteria for articles). Describe which outcome measures, time points, interventions, and comparison groups were addressed by your study. Describe the search strategy (databases searched, exact search strings used). Describe the data extraction strategy (how you retrieved the relevant data from the articles, who retrieved them, and how disagreements between the extractors were resolved). Describe the method for evaluating the quality of evidence from each article. Results Summarize the main (important) results for each table and figure Brief summary of Table 1 Brief summary of Table 2 Brief summary of Table 3 (this table could include each article’s quality rating) Brief summary of Table 4 Limitations and Strengths Briefly state your study’s limitations. Common limitations are few high quality studies, publication bias, and possibility of excluding relevant articles based on search strategy. Briefly state your study’s strengths. Common strengths are investigating a new topic and synthesizing results from many relevant populations. Conclusions Bullet point your conclusions here. These can include suggestions for future research and recommendations for clinical care. Table 2. Article Quality Rating System [decide on a rating system and report it here] Table 3. Characteristics of Studies Table 1. Number of Abstracts Identified Table 4. Summary of Study Findings Article Identif ier (first author, year) Ouctome 1 Events/T otal Ouctome 2 Events/T otal Odds Ratio (95% Confiden ce Interval ) Article 1 Data Data data Article 2 data data data Article 3 data data data Category Score Study Design Ecological study Cross-sectional survey Retrospective case control Longitudinal cohort Randomized control trial X X X X X Recruitment Random selection Other, but well described Not reported X X X Response Rate at Baseline >60% <60% X x Response Rate at Follow-up <20% per year >20% per year Not reported X X X Training of Examiners Yes, described Yes, not described No or not reported X X x Reliability of Examiners Reliability assessed & statistics reported Reliability assessed, but statistics not reported Not reported X X x Confounders Adjusted for in the Analyses Yes Not reported X X Question Medline EmBase Total Abstrac ts Papers Reviewed Number of Papers Included Question 1 data data data data data Question 2 data data data data data Question 3 data data data data data Total N N N N N Article Identif ier (first author, year) Setti ng Diagno sis Sampl e Size Interven tion Primar y Outcom e Studie d Length of Follow-up Article 1 data Data data data data Data Article 2 data data data data data Data Article 3 data data data data data data

Upload
ursula-lucas
Category

Documents
view
214
download
2

Embed Size (px):

Transcript of Type Your Title Here Author’s First Name Last Name, degree,…. Mentor’s First Name Last Name,...

Type Your Title HereAuthor’s First Name Last Name, degree,…. Mentor’s First Name Last Name, degree

Dept. Name here, NYU Lutheran Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY

Introduction

Bullet point background information that establishes the importance of the topic.

Identify rationale for your review and gaps in the literature that your review will fill.

List the focused clinical questions to be addressed in your review as individual bullet points (if more than one)

Methods

Describe the study screening and selection criteria (inclusion/exclusion criteria for articles).

Describe which outcome measures, time points, interventions, and comparison groups were addressed by your study.

Describe the search strategy (databases searched, exact search strings used).

Describe the data extraction strategy (how you retrieved the relevant data from the articles, who retrieved them, and how disagreements between the extractors were resolved).

Describe the method for evaluating the quality of evidence from each article.

Results

Summarize the main (important) results for each table and figure

Brief summary of Table 1 Brief summary of Table 2 Brief summary of Table 3 (this table could include

each article’s quality rating) Brief summary of Table 4

Limitations and Strengths

Briefly state your study’s limitations. Common limitations are few high quality studies, publication bias, and possibility of excluding relevant articles based on search strategy.

Briefly state your study’s strengths. Common strengths are investigating a new topic and synthesizing results from many relevant populations.

Conclusions

Bullet point your conclusions here. These can include suggestions for future

research and recommendations for clinical care.

Table 2. Article Quality Rating System[decide on a rating system and report it here]

Table 3. Characteristics of StudiesTable 1. Number of Abstracts Identified

Table 4. Summary of Study Findings

Article Identifier (first author, year)

Ouctome 1

Events/Total

Ouctome 2

Events/Total