1. Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences Your Infrastructure:- Choosing & Using Your Guidelines Getting Started With Your Systematic Review A Workshop by:- Kendall Searle Josefine Antoniades

2. HOW? A collaborative workshop format! This work shop will help you to:- 1.Refine your research question 2.Give you feedback on your research question 3.Give you search-strategy leads 4.Provide some infrastructure to facilitate a systematic approach 5.Give practical time-saving tips 6.Reflect a student’s real learning! 2 This work shop will not address:- 1.The different syntax used for different search engines (Anne Young) 2.Concepts concerning bias 3.The tools needed to appraise the quality of your articles 4.Key analysis approaches e.g.: narrative and meta analysis These will be covered in forthcoming workshops!

3. How we are going to divide our time:- Managing the Panic:- Putting order into the overall task! Defining the Question With PICOS:- Time for a lucky dip! Musical Graffiti! When scientists must be linguists too! Good enough to repeat! Can someone else follow your route map? 3

4. Every Body Panic Now! 4 You have to do a SYSTEMATIC what??!!

5. Exercise One: Everybody Panic Now! 5  Arrange yourselves into groups  Each group to receive one envelope  Inside each envelope you will find a set of phrases  You have five minutes to read each of the phrases in turn and then place them in a logical order  Once you have decided your order, use the blue-tack to stick them up on the white-board.

6. After the Panic Comes Order!  What do you notice about the orders?  Where have you seen these statements before?  What is the gold standard approach?  How does the gold standard differ from the average student experience?  If you are time and resource poor, which steps might you cut out? –What is the consequence of this?  What other steps, if any, would you add? 6 See Hand Out: Exercise 1:Everybody Panic Now

7. 7

8. 13 August 2014Systematic Reviews http://www.prisma-statement.org/2.1.2%20-%20PRISMA%202009%20Checklist.pdf

9. 13 August 2014Systematic Reviews

10. What is a Systematic Review? 10 A trusty route map!

11. Top Tips from a Newly Initiated Student  Infrastructure is your Protocol. A plan for resource allocation!  Infrastructure avoids bias!  Infrastructure helps you to manage your supervisor and collaborators – and look good!  Infrastructure aids writing up by giving you personal targets  Infrastructure makes analysis quick and easy! 11 Even the greatest of works needed infrastructure to aid the making!

12. Facilitate Your Briefing With An Easy to Use List:- 12 Source: Common mental disorder among factory workers in mainland China:- a systematic review by Kendall Searle

13. YOUR PRISMA FLOW CHART 13 Don’t be shy about writing it up as you go along. Use it as a reward system for yourself! It keeps track of your work and needs to be included in your final paper anyway!

14. Maximise on End Note As A Site to:-  Download each of your database searches  Deal with duplicates  Record each of your screening steps  Code your screen-outs  Build a PDF resource  Write-up with citations 14 Source: Common Mental Disorders Amongst Migrant/Factory Workers in Mainland China: Coding in Progress

15. Which Guide For You? PRISMA Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta- analyses (2009) Handy PICOS to help frame your question Covers non-randomised studies to assess the benefits and harms of interventions Can be modified for diagnosis or prognosis 27-point check list 15 CONSORT 2010 Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (1996) Initial scope covers two- armed, parallel, randomized, controlled trials Extensions for non-inferiority, equivalence, factorial, cluster, crossover trials 25-point check list (but lots of a’s and b’s!) Reporting of funding & ethics advised but not in check list Institute of Medicine, USA www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/ Finding-What-Works-in- Health-Care-Standards-for- Systematic-Reviews.aspx Emphasizes team approach Itemizes conflict of interest and funding concerns Considers qualitative alongside quantitative review Divides standards into 4 activity groups Clear, complete and transparent reporting of trial information to provide an unbiased evidence-base for decision making

16. PICOS:- Frames your research interest to improve the explicitness of your review question P I C O S 16

17. PICOS:- Frames your research interest to improve the explicitness of your review question P articipants The patient population or disease being addressed I C O S 17

18. PICOS:- Frames your research interest to improve the explicitness of your review question P articipants The patient population or disease being addressed I nterventions The interventions or exposure of interest C O S 18

19. PICOS:- Frames your research interest to improve the explicitness of your review question P articipants The patient population or disease being addressed I nterventions The interventions or exposure of interest C omparisons The comparators O S 19

20. PICOS:- Frames your research interest to improve the explicitness of your review question P articipants The patient population or disease being addressed I nterventions The interventions or exposure of interest C omparisons The comparators O utcomes The main outcome or endpoint of interest S 20

21. PICOS:- Frames your research interest to improve the explicitness of your review question P articipants The patient population or disease being addressed I nterventions The interventions or exposure of interest C omparisons The comparators O utcomes The main outcome or endpoint of interest S tudy design The study designs chosen 21

22. Refining Your Research Question A student case study Common Mental Disorders amongst Migrants/Factory Workers in Mainland China 22

23. PICOS:- Frames your research interest to improve the explicitness of your review question P articipants The patient population or disease being addressed Factory workers in main- land China I nterventions The interventions or exposure of interest Internationally recognized diagnostic and screening tools which measure common mental health disorders and quality-of-life C omparisons The comparatorsNon-factory workers, Urban and rural counter-parts O utcomes The main outcome or endpoint of interest Common mental disorders; Quality-of-life S tudy design The study designs chosen Will consider a range of study types (e.g. Cross-sectional) 23

24. Important Websites  The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions www.cochrane.org/handbook www.cochrane.org/handbook  PRISMA Transparent reporting of systematic reviews and meta- analyses http://www.prisma-statement.org/http://www.prisma-statement.org/  Institute of Medicine, USA. Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Finding- What-Works-in-Health-Care-Standards-for-Systematic-Reviews.aspxwww.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Finding- What-Works-in-Health-Care-Standards-for-Systematic-Reviews.aspx  International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO 24