Dual computer monitors to increase efficiency of conducting systematic reviews

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 67, Issue 12, 2014, Pages 1353-1357

  Wang, Zhen ^a   Asi, Noor ^a   Elraiyah, Tarig A ^a   Dabrh, Abd Moain Abu ^a   Undavalli, Chaitanya ^a   Glasziou, Paul ^b   Montori, Victor ^a   Murad, Mohammad Hassan ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b BOND UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Efficiency; Evidence based medicine; Research design; Systematic reviews; Technology; Validity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPUTER; DATA EXTRACTION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; MONITOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REDUCTION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); TIME; COMPUTER TERMINAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA MINING; HUMAN; LITERATURE; PRODUCTIVITY; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

COMPUTER TERMINALS; DATA MINING; EFFICIENCY; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84922480172     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.06.011     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. The Cochrane Collaboration. Archie Cochrane: the name behind The Cochrane Collaboration. Oxford: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2010.
2. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:224-33.
3. Beller EM, Chen JK, Wang UL, Glasziou PP. Are systematic reviews up-to-date at the time of publication? Syst Rev 2013;2:36.
4. Smith V, Devane D, Begley CM, Clarke M. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011;11:15.
5. Kiritchenko S, de Bruijn B, Carini S, Martin J, Sim I. ExaCT: automatic extraction of clinical trial characteristics from journal publications. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2010;10:56.
6. Colvin J, Tobler N, Anderson JA. Productivity and multi-screen computer displays. Rocky Mountain Comm Rev 2004;2:31-53.
7. Dell Computer. Dual monitors boost productivity, user satisfaction. New York: Ziff Davis Enterprise; 2011.
8. Ross S. Two screens are better than one. Microsoft research news & highlights. 2006.
9. Shah RD, Cao A, Golenberg L, Ellis RD, Auner GW, Pandya AK, et al. Performance of basic manipulation and intracorporeal suturing tasks in a robotic surgical system: single- versus dual-monitor views. Surg Endosc 2009;23:727-33.
10. Murad MH, Montori VM. Focusing on the body of evidence - reply. JAMA 2013;310:1290.
11. Pham B, Klassen TP, Lawson ML, Moher D. Language of publication restrictions in systematic reviews gave different results depending on whether the intervention was conventional or complementary. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:769-76.
12. Morrison A, Polisena J, Husereau D, Moulton K, Clark M, Fiander M, et al. The effect of English-language restriction on systematic review-based meta-analyses: a systematic review of empirical studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2012;28:138-44.
13. Shiwa SR, Moseley AM, Maher CG, Pena Costa LO. Language of publication has a small influence on the quality of reports of controlled trials of physiotherapy interventions. J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:78-84.
14. Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP. Content area experts as authors: helpful or harmful for systematic reviews and meta-analyses? BMJ 2012;345:e7031.
15. Thomson D, Russell K, Becker L, Klassen T, Hartling L. The evolution of a new publication type: steps and challenges of producing overviews of reviews. Res Synth Methods 2010;1:198-211.
16. Tsafnat G, Dunn A, Glasziou P, Coiera E. The automation of systematic reviews. BMJ 2013;346:f139.
17. Cohen AM. Optimizing feature representation for automated systematic review work prioritization. AMIA Annu Symp Proc 2008;2008:121-5.
18. Cohen AM, Ambert K, McDonagh M. Studying the potential impact of automated document classification on scheduling a systematic review update. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2012;12:33.