Varieties of integrative scholarship: Why rules of evidence, criteria, and standards matter

Academic Medicine

Volumn 90, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 294-302

  McGaghie, William C ^a  

^a LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; MEDICAL EDUCATION; METHODOLOGY; PEER REVIEW; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH;

EDUCATION, MEDICAL; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FELLOWSHIPS AND SCHOLARSHIPS; HUMANS; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84924167554     PISSN: 10402446     EISSN: 1938808X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000585     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Boyer EL. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; 1990
2. Chalmers I, Hedges LV, Cooper H. A brief history of research synthesis. Eval Health Prof. 2002;25:12-37
3. Strech D, Tilburt J. Value judgments in the analysis and synthesis of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:521-524
4. Cicchetti DV. The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation. Beh Brain Sci. 1991;14:119-186
5. Fiske DW, Fogg L. But the reviewers are making different criticisms of my paper! Diversity and uniqueness in reviewer comments. Am Psychol. 1990;45:591-598
6. Rothwell PM, Martyn CN. Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience. Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone?. Brain. 2000;123(pt 9):1964-1969
7. Dixon-Woods M, Sutton A, Shaw R, et al. Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: A quantitative and qualitative comparison of three methods. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007;12:42-47
8. Murad MH, Montori VM. Synthesizing evidence: Shifting the focus from individual studies to the body of evidence. JAMA. 2013;309:2217-2218
9. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Cohen ER, Barsuk JH, Wayne DB. Translational educational research: A necessity for effective health-care improvement. Chest. 2012;142:1097-1103
10. Cooper H. Research Synthesis and Meta- Analysis: A Step-by-Step Approach. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 2010
11. Sturm LP, Windsor JA, Cosman PH, Cregan P, Hewett PJ, Maddern GJ. A systematic review of skills transfer after surgical simulation training. Ann Surg. 2008;248:166-179
12. Dixon-Woods M, Bosk CL, Aveling EL, Goeschel CA, Pronovost PJ. Explaining Michigan: Developing an ex post theory of a quality improvement program. Milbank Q. 2011;89:167-205
13. Pronovost P, Needham D, Berenholtz S, et al. An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:2725-2732
14. Pronovost PJ, Goeschel CA, Colantuoni E, et al. Sustaining reductions in catheter related bloodstream infections in Michigan intensive care units: Observational study. BMJ. 2010;340:c309
15. Academic Medicine. Editorial policy, publication ethics, and complete instructions for authors. http://journals. lww.com/academicmedicine/Pages/InstructionsforAuthors.aspx. Accessed September 23, 2014
16. Advances in Health Sciences Education. Interested in publishing your article in this journal?. http://www.springer.com/education+%26+language/journal/10459. Accessed September 23, 2014
17. American Journal of Nursing. Writing for the American Journal of Nursing: Author guidelines. http://edmgr.ovid.com/ajn/accounts/ifauth.htm. Accessed September 23, 2014
18. Journal of Graduate Medical Education. Author instructions.http://www.jgme.org/page/author-instructions. Accessed September 23, 2014
19. Medical Science Educator. Types of submissions.http://www.medicalscienceeducator.org/submissions.html. Accessed September 23, 2014
20. Teaching and Learning in Medicine. Instructions for authors. http://www.tandfonline.com.action/authorSubmission?jo urnalCode=htlm20&page=instructionsforaut hors. Accessed September 23, 2014
21. CHEST. For authors: Instructions & policies. http://journal.publications.chestnet.org/ss/forauthors.aspx. Accessed September 23, 2014
22. Annals of Surgery. Instructions for authors. http://edmgr.ovid.com/annsurg/accounts/ifauth.htm. Accessed September 23, 2014
23. Health Psychology. Instructions to authors. http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/hea/index. aspx. Accessed September 23, 2014
24. Psychological Bulletin. Instructions to authors. http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/bul/index.aspx. Accessed September 23, 2014
25. Cooper H, Koenka AC. The overview of reviews: Unique challenges and opportunities when research syntheses are the principal elements of new integrative scholarship. Am Psychol. 2012;67:446-462
26. Cooper HM.organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowl Soc. 1988;1:104-126
27. Strike K, Posner G. Types of synthesis and their criteria. In: Ward SA, Reed LJ, eds. Knowledge Structure and Use: Implications for Synthesis and Interpretation. Philadelphia, Pa: Temple University Press; 1983
28. Booth WC, Colomb GG, Williams JM. The Craft of Research. Chicago, Ill: University of Chicago Press; 1995
29. Bem D. Writing a review article for Psychological Bulletin. Psychol Bull. 1995;118:172-177
30. Busari JO, Berkenbosch L, Brouns JW. Physicians as managers of health care delivery and the implications for postgraduate medical training: A literature review. Teach Learn Med. 2011;23:186-196
31. Imel S. Writing a literature review. In: Rocco TS, Hatcher T, eds. The Handbook of Scholarly Writing and Publishing. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass; 2011
32. Côté L, Turgeon J. Appraising qualitative research articles in medicine and medical education. Med Teach. 2005;27:71-75
33. Review of Educational Research. Standards and criteria. http://www.sagepub.com/journalsProdDesc. nav?prodId=Journal201854. Accessed September 23, 2014
34. Johnson BT, Eagly AH. Quantitative synthesis of social psychological research. CHIP Documents. Paper 13. http://digitalcommons.uconn.edu/chip-docs/13. Accessed September 23, 2014
35. Ericsson KA. Deliberate practice and the acquisition and maintenance of expert performance in medicine and related domains. Acad Med. 2004;79(10 suppl):S70-S81
36. Schreier HM, Chen E. Socioeconomic status and the health of youth: A multilevel, multidomain approach to conceptualizing pathways. Psychol Bull. 2013;139:606-654
37. National Health and Medical Research Council. How to Review the Evidence: Systematic Identification and Review of the Scientific Literature. Canberra, Australia: National Health and Medical Research Council; 1999
38. Albanese M, Norcini J. Systematic reviews: What they are and why should we care?. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2002;7:147-151
39. Lang TA. The value of systematic reviews as research activities in medical education. Acad Med. 2004;79:1067-1072
40. Academic Medicine staff. Tips for submitting systematic reviews to Academic Medicine. http://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Documents/AMSystematicReviewTips.pdf. Accessed September 23, 2014
41. Best Evidence Medical and Health Professional Education Collaboration (BEME). http://www.bemecollaboration.org/. Accessed September 23, 2014
42. Campbell Collaboration. http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/. Accessed September 23, 2014
43. Cochrane Collaboration. http://www.cochrane.org/. Accessed September 23, 2014
44. Haig A, Dozier M. BEME guide no 3: Systematic searching for evidence in medical education-part 1: Sources of information. Med Teach. 2003;25:352-363
45. Haig A, Dozier M. BEME guide no. 3: Systematic searching for evidence in medical education-part 2: Constructing searches. Med Teach. 2003;25:463-484
46. Reed DA, Cook DA, Beckman TJ, Levine RB, Kern DE, Wright SM. Association between funding and quality of published medical education research. JAMA. 2007;298: 1002-1009
47. Valentine JC, Cooper H, Patall EA, Tyson D, Robinson JC. A method for evaluating research syntheses: The quality, conclusions, and consensus of 12 syntheses of effects of after-school programs. Res Syn Methods 2010;1:20-38
48. Beretvas SN. Meta-Analysis. In: Hancock GR, Mueller RO, eds. The Reviewer's Guide to Quantitative Methods in the Social Sciences. New York, NY: Routledge; 2010
49. Valentine JC. Meta-Analysis. In: Cooper H, ed. APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology. Vol 3: Data Analysis and Research Publication. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2012
50. Anzures-Cabrera J, Higgins JPT. Graphical displays for meta-Analysis: An overview with suggestions for practice. Res Syn Methods. 2010;1:66-80
51. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: A BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27:10-28
52. Lang TA, Seic M. Reporting systematic reviews and meta-Analyses. In: How to Report Statistics in Medicine. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: American College of Physicians; 2006
53. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:264-269, W64
54. Cook DA, Hatala R, Brydges R, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: A systematic review and meta-Analysis. JAMA. 2011;306:978-988
55. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Cohen ER, Barsuk JH, Wayne DB. Does simulationbased medical education with deliberate practice yield better results than traditional clinical education?. A meta-Analytic comparative review of the evidence. Acad Med. 2011;86:706-711
56. Ria Jochemsen-van der Leeuw HGA, van Dijd N, van Etten-Jamaludin FS, Wieringade Waard M. The attributes of the clinical trainer as a role model: A systematic review. Acad Med. 2013;88:26-34
57. Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist review-A new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(suppl 1):21-34
58. McCormack B, Wright J, Dewar B, Harvey G, Ballintine K. A realist synthesis of evidence relating to practice development: Methodology and methods. Pract Dev Health Care. 2007;6:5-24
59. Anderson S, Allen P, Peckham S, Goodwin N. Asking the right questions: Scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health services. Health Res Policy Syst. 2008;6:7
60. Davis K, Drey N, Gould D. What are scoping studies?. A review of the nursing literature. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009;46:1386-1400
61. Armstrong R, Hall BJ, Doyle J, Waters E. Cochrane update: "Scoping the scope" of a Cochrane review. J Public Health (Oxf). 2011;33:147-150
62. Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Method. 2005; 8:19-32
63. Mays N, Roberts E, Popay J. Synthesising research evidence. In: Fulop N, Allen P, Clarke A, Black N, eds. Studying the Organization and Delivery of Health Services: Research Methods. London, UK: Routledge; 2001
64. Brien SE, Lorenzetti DL, Lewis S, Kennedy J, Ghali WA. Overview of a formal scoping review on health system report cards. Implement Sci. 2010;5:2
65. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK. Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:69
66. Rycroft-Malone J, McCormack B, Hutchinson AM, et al. Realist synthesis: Illustrating the method for implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7:33
67. Pawson R. Evidence-Based Policy: A Realist Perspective. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 2001
68. Norman GR, Eva KW. Quantitative Research Methods in Medical Education. Edinburgh, Scotland: Association for the Study of Medical Education; 2009
69. Eva KW. On the limits of systematicity. Med Educ. 2008;42:852-853
70. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER, Scalese RJ. A critical review of simulationbased medical education research: 2003-2009. Med Educ. 2010;44:50-63
71. Tavares W, Eva KW. Exploring the impact of mental workload on rater-based assessments. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2013;18:291-303
72. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. Instructions for Authors. http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=bbs. Accessed September 23, 2014
73. Cowan N. The magic number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behav Brain Sci. 2000;24:87-185
74. Glassick CE, Huber MT, Maeroff GI. Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass; 1997
75. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: Realist syntheses. J Adv Nurs. 2013;69:1005-1022
76. Eisner EW. The Enlightened Eye. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Co.; 1991
77. van de Wijngaert L, Bouwman H, Contractor N. A network approach toward literature review. Qual Quant. 2014;48: 623-643