9
CONDUCTING AND PUBLISHING CRITICAL REVIEWS PROFESSOR JON ADAMS PROFESSOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH FACULTY OF HEALTH UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY SENIOR FELLOW & SENIOR MENTOR INTERNATIONAL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY CARE HEALTH SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

John Adam in ums workshop of critical reviews

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

  • 1. CONDUCTING AND PUBLISHING CRITICAL REVIEWS PROFESSOR JON ADAMS PROFESSOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH FACULTY OF HEALTH UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY SENIOR FELLOW & SENIOR MENTOR INTERNATIONAL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY CARE HEALTH SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

2. CONTEXT AND SIGNIFICANCE OF CRITICAL REVIEWS? Critical reviews are thematic/narrative based reviews that can incorporate both quantitative and qualitative studiesFocused beyond efficacy (not systematic reviews/meta-analyses)Can address Important public health, health services and health social science questionsProviding state-of-the-art, rigorous, critical overview for readers; aiding the field by supplying comprehensive analyses of literatureCan feed directly into practice and policy changeIncreasingly published in prestigious medical & health journals 3. TYPICAL RESEARCH AREAS/QUESTIONS FOR CRITICAL REVIEW Use of traditional medicine for a particular condition OR amongst a particular population Attitudes and behaviours of professionals/patients to traditional medicine The relationship between traditional medicine AND rural health/rural health care Communication between patients and providers regarding traditional medicine 4. INITIAL QUESTIONS TO ADDRESS FOR A SUCCESSFUL CRITICAL REVIEW A significant research topic/question that an audience may require to be addressed? Is there sufficient data/publication to warrant review? Has anyone done a similar critical review recently? 5. CORE INGREDIENTS OF A RIGOROUS, CRITICAL REVIEW Explicit inclusion/exclusion criteria Explicit process of literature search Explicit interpretation and appraisal of data Databases? Hand searches? Snowball searching via references? Keywords? Timeframe? Type of manuscripts/literature to be reviewed? 6. SEARCH PROCESS Databases? Hand searches? Snowball searching via references? Keywords? Timeframe? Type of manuscripts/literature to be reviewed? Language of literature to be included? 7. FINAL INCLUSION Screen Abstracts/full papers Exclude efficacy studies/trials, editorials, commentaries, etc Focus upon manuscripts reporting new empirical data from research Work through a flow chart to help you keep check 8. INTERPRETATION, ANALYSIS AND APPRAISAL Familiarise yourself with all included papers Make rough initial notes of what they report (main findings) Begin to organise and group the papers via themes/broad issues (they will often be assigned to more than one theme) Write up overview of main findings for each theme/issue Employ a pre-tested critical appraisal tool to evaluate the methodological rigour of appropriate papers under review 9. GETTING A CRITICAL REVIEW PUBLISHED Choice and readership of journal Do they take critical reviews? What have previous critical reviews looked like in the journal? Be explicit/transparent Structure the paper same as any other empirical research paper