Systematic review in diagnostic radiology

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 78-83

  MacDonald Jankowski, D S ^a   Dozier, M F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Diagnostic imaging; Meta analysis; Radiography, dental; Review literature

Indexed keywords

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DENTAL RESEARCH; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT SELECTION; REVIEW; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY;

DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DENTAL RESEARCH; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; META-ANALYSIS; PATIENT SELECTION; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE;

EID: 0035291434     PISSN: 0250832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600586     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. Gøtzsche PC, Olsen O. Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? Lancet 2000; 355: 129-134.
2. Sackett DL, Strauss SE, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence-based medicine. How to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Churchill-Livingstone, 2000. pp 133-136.
3. Clarke M, Oxman AD (eds). Cochrane reviewers' handbook. 4.0 [updated July 1999] In: Review manager [RevMan] [computer program].version 4.0. Oxford, England: The Cochrane Collaboration, 1999. http://www.cochrane.de/cochrane/hbook.htm
4. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/search.htm
5. York Centre for Reviews of Effectiveness, (have done work relevant to dentistry) http://agatha.york.ac.uk/ htahp.htm
6. DARE http/www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/welcome.htm
7. Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes B. Synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. In: Mulrow C, Cook D (eds). Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for health care decisions. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians, 1998, pp 5-12.
8. Egger M, Schneider M, Smith GD. Meta-analysis. Spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies. BMJ 1998; 316: 140-144.
9. Kelly S, Berry E, Roderick P, Harris KM, Cullingworth J, Gathercole L, et al. The identification of bias in studies of diagnostic performance of imaging modalities. Br J Radiol 1997; 70: 1028-1035.
10. Foster GR, Scott DA, Payne S. The use of CT scanning in dementia. A systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1999; 15: 406-423.
11. Egger M, Smith GD. Meta-analysis. Potentials and promise. BMJ 1997; 315: 1371-1374.
12. Greenhalgh T. Papers that summarise other papers (systematic review and meta-analysis). BMJ 1997; 315: 672-675.
13. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology. A proposal for reporting. JAMA 2000; 283: 2008-2012.
14. Hirschmann PN. Dentomaxillofacial radiology. A journal of head and neck imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1993; 22: 3-6.
15. Liedberg J, Panmekiate S, Petersson A, Rohlin M. Evidence-based evaluation of three imaging methods for the temporomandibular disc. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1996; 25: 234-241.
16. MacDonald-Jankowski DS. Fibrous dysplasia in the jaws of a Hong Kong population: radiographic presentation and systematic review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999; 28: 195-202.
17. MacDonald-Jankowski DS. Idiopathic osteosclerosis in the jaws of Britons and of the Hong Kong Chinese: radiology and systematic review. Dentomaxillofac Radiao 1999; 28: 357-363.
18. Counsell C. Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic review. In: Mulrow C, Cook D (eds). Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for health care decisions. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians, 1998, pp 67-79.
19. Arrivé L, Renard R, Carrat F, Belkacem A, Dahan H, Le Hir P, Monnier-Cholley L, Tubiana J-M. A scale of methodological quality for clinical studies of radiologic examinations. Radiology 2000; 217: 69-74.
20. Decks J, Glanville J, Sheldon T. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness. CRD guidelines for those carrying out or commissioning reviews. Report 4. York: NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 1996.
21. Goodman C. Literature searching and evidence interpretation for assessing health care practice. SBU report No. 119. Stockholm: SBU-Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1993. [full-text online from http://www.sbu.se/ sbu-site/index .html]
22. Egger M, Smith GD. Meta-analysis. Bias in location and selection of studies. BMJ 1998; 316: 61-66.
23. de Konig HJ. Assessment of nationwide cancer-screening programmes: commentary. Lancet 2000; 355: 80-81.
24. Medline (United States National Library of Medicine database). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/
25. Allison JJ, Kiefe CI, Weissman NW, Carter J, Center RM. The art and science of searching Medline to answer clinical questions. Finding the right number of articles. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1999; 15: 281-296.
26. Embase. (Amsterdam: Elsevier) http://www.elsevier.nl/homepage/sah/spd/embase/menu.htm
27. Information on OldMedline and PreMedline http:// www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/factsheets/online_databases.html
28. Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper. The Medline database. BMJ 1997; 315: 180-183.
29. http://www.nnlm.nlm.nih.gov/train/
30. ISI Web of Science, http://www.isinet.com/isi/products/citation/wos
31. http://wos.mimas.ac.uk
32. LILACS (Latin America and Caribbean regional medical literature) http://www.epm.br/cochrane/lilacs.htm
33. Sousa Escandon MA, Gonzalez Guitian C, Gonzalez Fernandez MM. What language will Medline speak next millennium [in Spanish]. Arch Esp de Urol 2000; 53: 93-99.
34. The Health Information Research Unit at McMaster University: http://hiru.mcmaster.ca
35. Mulrow C, Cook D. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for health care decisions. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians, 1998.
36. Medical subject heading annotated alphabetic list, http:// www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
37. Rosenfeld RM. How to systematically review the medical literature. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1996; 115: 53-63.
38. Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C. Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ 1994; 309: 1286-1291.
39. SIGLE (System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe). http://www.kb.nl/infolev/eagle/content.htm
40. Dissertation Abstracts. http://www.umi.com/hp/Support/DServices/products/da.htm
41. Index to Theses, http://www.theses.com/
42. Karolinska Institute Library. http://www.kib.ki.se/index_en.html
43. UMIN (University Hospital Medical Information Network): http://www.umin.ac.jp/eng/
44. Shapland M. Evaluation of reference management software on NT. [updated 13 July 2000] http://www.cse.bris.ac.uk/~ccmjs/ rmeval99.htm
45. Greenhalgh T. Papers that report diagnostic or screening tests. BMJ 1997; 315: 540-543.
46. Greenhalgh T, Donald A. Evidence based health care workbook for individual and group learning. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 2000, pp 97-109.
47. Wenzel A, Verdonschot EH. Some considerations in the evaluation of diagnosis tests in dentistry. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1994; 23: 179-182.
48. Jadad AR, Moher M, Browman GP, Booker L, Sigoiun C, Fuentes M, Stevens M. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation. BMJ 2000; 320: 537-540.
49. Rohlin M, Mileman PA. Decision analysis in dentistry - the last 30 years. J Dent 2000; 28: 453-468.