Defining the publication source of high-quality evidence in urology: An analysis of EvidenceUpdates

BJU International

Volumn 117, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 861-866

  Narayan, Vikram M ^a   Chrouser, Kristin ^a   Haynes, Robert B ^b   Parrish, Rick ^b   Dahm, Philipp ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

decision making tools; evidence based medicine; evidence based urology; EvidenceUpdates; peer reviewed resources

Indexed keywords

CITATION ANALYSIS; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL RELEVANCE; COCHRANE LIBRARY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; EVIDENCEUPDATES; HUMAN; MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MICTURITION DISORDER; NEWSWORTHINESS; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; ONCOLOGY; PARAMETERS; PEER REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; STUDY DESIGN; TREND STUDY; UROLOGIST; UROLOGY; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; STANDARDS; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

CLINICAL DECISION-MAKING; EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; HUMANS; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBLICATIONS; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; UROLOGY;

EID: 84953791887     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/bju.13392     Document Type: Review

References (14)

1. Scales CD Jr, Preminger GM, Keitz SA, Dahm P,. Evidence based clinical practice: a primer for urologists. J Urol 2007; 178: 775-82
2. McMaster University. Evidence Updates Inclusion Criteria. updated 14 November 2013. Available at: http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/hiru/InclusionCriteria.html. Accessed January 2015
3. Haynes RB, Cotoi C, Holland J, et al. Second-order peer review of the medical literature for clinical practitioners. JAMA 2006; 295: 1801-8
4. Lokker C, McKibbon KA, McKinlay RJ, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB,. Prediction of citation counts for clinical articles at two years using data available within three weeks of publication: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2008; 336: 655-7
5. Rochon PA, Bero LA, Bay AM, et al. Comparison of review articles published in peer-reviewed and throwaway journals. JAMA 2002; 287: 2853-6
6. Choudhry NK, Fletcher RH, Soumerai SB,. Systematic review: the relationship between clinical experience and quality of health care. Ann Intern Med 2005; 142: 260-73
7. Evans CE, Haynes RB, Gilbert JR, Taylor DW, Sackett DL, Johnston M,. Educational package on hypertension for primary care physicians. Can Med Assoc J 1984; 130: 719-22
8. Scales CD, Voils CI, Fesperman SF, et al. Barriers to the practice of evidence-based urology. J Urol 2008; 179: 2345-50
9. Haynes B,. Of studies, syntheses, synopses, summaries, and systems: the "5S" evolution of information services for evidence-based healthcare decisions. Evid Based Nurs 2007; 10: 6-7
10. Corbyons K, Han J, Neuberger MM, Dahm P,. Methodological quality of systematic reviews published in the urological literature over a 15-year time-period (1998 to 2012). J Urol 2015; 194: 1374-9
11. McKibbon KA, Lokker C, Wilczynski NL, et al. Search filters can find some but not all knowledge translation articles in MEDLINE: an analytic survey. J Clin Epidemiol 2012; 65: 651-9
12. Rennie D, Bero LA,. Throw it away, Sam: the controlled circulation journals. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990; 155: 889-92
13. McMaster University. EvidenceUpdates. About This Site, 2015. Available at: https://plus.mcmaster.ca/evidenceupdates/AboutThisSite.aspx. Accessed July 2015
14. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007; 7: 10