Searching the Resource Information Network
Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.
Synthesizing evidence from randomized controlled trials of digital health education poses some challenges. These include a lack of clear categorization of digital health education in the literature; constantly evolving concepts, pedagogies, or theories; and a multitude of methods, features, technologies, or delivery settings. The Digital Health Education Collaboration was established to evaluate the evidence on digital education in health professions; inform policymakers, educators, and students; and ultimately, change the way in which these professionals learn and are taught. The aim of this paper is to present the overarching methodology that we use to synthesize evidence across our digital health education reviews and to discuss challenges related to the process. For our research, we followed Cochrane recommendations for the conduct of systematic reviews; all reviews are reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidance. This included assembling experts in various digital health education fields; identifying gaps in the evidence base; formulating focused research questions, aims, and outcome measures; choosing appropriate search terms and databases; defining inclusion and exclusion criteria; running the searches jointly with librarians and information specialists; managing abstracts; retrieving full-text versions of papers; extracting and storing large datasets, critically appraising the quality of studies; analyzing data; discussing findings; drawing meaningful conclusions; and drafting research papers. The approach used for synthesizing evidence from digital health education trials is commonly regarded as the most rigorous benchmark for conducting systematic reviews. Although we acknowledge the presence of certain biases ingrained in the process, we have clearly highlighted and minimized those biases by strictly adhering to scientific rigor, methodological integrity, and standard operating procedures. This paper will be a valuable asset for researchers and methodologists undertaking systematic reviews in digital health education.
Pubmed ID: 30762583
Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.
A bibliographic database that provides a highly concentrated source of reports of randomized controlled trials. Records contain the list of authors, the title of the article, the source, volume, issue, page numbers, and, in many cases, a summary of the article (abstract). They do not contain the full text of the article. Cochrane Groups maintain and update Specialized Registers, which are collections of controlled trials relevant to the groups. CENTRAL is comprised of these Specialized Registers, relevant records retrieved from MEDLINE and EMBASE, and records retrieved through handsearching (planned manual searching of a journal or conference proceedings to identify all reports of randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials). The Cochrane Collaboration contracts a technology company, Metaxis, to merge the records from the sources outlined above and provide a data feed to the publisher. New and changed data are delivered to the publisher on a monthly basis.
View all literature mentionsA software application which helps users build a bibliography as they write formatted papers, manuscripts and other research-rich documents. Users can search multiple databases and collect PDFs as references for papers, then organize them within EndNote. Bibliographies and citations can be compiled within Microsoft Word using built-in tools. Papers are stored within an EndNote library and can be shared with colleagues.
View all literature mentions