Reporting guidelines for health care simulation research

Simulation in Healthcare

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 238-248

  Cheng, Adam ^a   Kessler, David ^b   Mackinnon, Ralph ^c,d   Chang, Todd P ^e   Nadkarni, Vinay M ^f   Hunt, Elizabeth A ^g   Duval Arnould, Jordan ^g   Lin, Yiqun ^a   Cook, David A ^h   Pusic, Martin ⁱ   Hui, Joshua ^j   Moher, David ^k   Egger, Matthias ^l   Auerbach, Marc ^m  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^b College of Physicians and Surg ^*  (United States)

^c ROYAL MANCHESTER CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

^e UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^g JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^h MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

ⁱ NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^j UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^k OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^l UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^m YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Extension; Health care; Reporting guidelines; Research; Simulation

Indexed keywords

CONSENSUS; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLISHING; QUESTIONNAIRE; RESEARCH; SIMULATION TRAINING; STANDARDS;

CONSENSUS; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH; SIMULATION TRAINING; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84979970423     PISSN: 15592332     EISSN: 1559713X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000150     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. 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
2. Zendejas B, Brydges R, Wang AT, et al. Patient outcomes in simulation-based medical education: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med 2013; 28: 1078-1089
3. Brydges R, Hatala R, Zendejas B, et al. Linking simulation-based educational assessments and patient-related outcomes: a systematic review and meta-Analysis. Acad Med 2015; 90: 246-256
4. Cheng A, Grant V, Auerbach M. Using simulation to improve patient safety: dawn of a new era. JAMA Pediatr 2015; 169: 419-420
5. Cook DA. How much evidence does it take?. A cumulative meta-Analysis of outcomes of simulation-based education. Med Educ 2014; 48: 750-760
6. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Petrusa ER, et al. A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003-2009. Med Educ 2010; 44: 50-63
7. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Cohen ER, et al. Translational educational research: a necessity for effective health-care improvement. Chest 2012; 142: 1097-1103
8. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, et al. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach 2005; 27: 10-28
9. Cheng A, Lockey A, Bhanji F, et al. The use of high-fidelity manikins for advanced life support training: systematic review and meta-Analysis. Resuscitation. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation. 2015.04.004. Accessed April 14, 2015
10. Cheng A, Lang T, Starr S, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation and pediatric education: a meta-Analysis. Pediatrics 2014; 133: e1313-e1323
11. Cheng A, Eppich W, Grant V, et al. Debriefing for technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-Analysis. Med Educ 2014; 48: 657-666
12. Ilgen JS, Sherbino J, Cook DA. Technology-enhanced simulation in emergency medicine: a systematic review and meta-Analysis. Acad Emerg Med 2013; 20: 117-127
13. Lorello GR, Cook DA, Johnson RL, et al. Simulation-based training in anaesthesiology: a systematic review and meta-Analysis. Br J Anaesth 2014; 112: 231-245
14. Zendejas B, Brydges R, Hamstra SJ, et al. State of the evidence on simulation-based training for laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review. Ann Surg 2013; 257: 586-593
15. Dilaveri CA, Szostek JH, Wang AT, et al. Simulation training for breast and pelvic physical examination: a systematic review and meta-Analysis. BJOG 2013; 120: 1171-1182
16. Cheng A, Auerbach M, Chang T, et al. Designing and conducting simulation-based research. Pediatrics 2014; 133: 1091-1101
17. LeBlanc VR, Manser T, Weinger MB, et al. The study of factors affecting human and systems performance in healthcare using simulation. Simul Healthc 2011; 6: S24-S29
18. Raemer D, Anderson M, Cheng A, et al. Research regarding debriefing as part of the learning process. Simul Healthc 2011; 6: S52-S57
19. Cook DA, Hamstra SJ, Brydges R, et al. Comparative effectiveness of instructional design features in simulation-based education: systematic review and meta-Analysis. Med Teach 2013; 35: e867-e898
20. Glasziou P, Altman DG, Bossuyt P, et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet 2014; 383: 267-276
21. Cook DA, Beckman TJ, Bordage G. A systematic review of titles and abstracts of experimental studies in medical education: many informative elements missing. Med Educ 2007; 41: 1074-1081
22. Cook DA, Beckman TJ, Bordage G. Quality of reporting of experimental studies in medical education: a systematic review. Med Educ 2007; 41: 737-745
23. Cook DA, Levinson AJ, Garside S. Method and reporting quality in health professions education research: a systematic review. Med Educ 2011; 45: 227-238
24. Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ 2001; 323: 42-46
25. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996; 276: 637-639
26. Begley CG, Ioannidis JP. Reproducibility in science: improving the standard for basic and preclinical research. Circ Res 2015; 116: 116-126
27. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Lancet 2001; 357: 1191-1194
28. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al. CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010; 340: c869
29. Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF. Opportunities and challenges for improving the quality of reporting clinical research: CONSORT and beyond. CMAJ 2004; 171: 349-350
30. Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials?. A systematic review. Med J Aust 2006; 185: 263-267
31. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med 2007; 147: 573-577
32. Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2007; 4: e297
33. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-Analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 2015; 4: 1
34. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151: 264-269
35. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-Analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151: W65-W94
36. Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research. Equator Network library for health research reporting. Available at: http://www.equator-network.org/library/. Accessed May 28, 2015
37. Golub RM, Fontanarosa PB. Researchers, readers, and reporting guidelines: writing between the lines. JAMA 2015; 313: 1625-1626
38. Campbell MK, Elbourne DR, Altman DG; CONSORT group. CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ 2004; 328: 702-708
39. Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Altman DG, et al. Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. JAMA 2006; 295: 1152-1160
40. Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, et al. Methods and processes of the CONSORT group: example of an extension for trials assessing nonpharmacologic treatments. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148: W60-W66
41. Little J, Higgins JP, Ioannidis JP, et al. Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA)Van extension of the STROBE statement. Eur J Clin Invest 2009; 39: 247-266
42. Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, et al. Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines. PLoS Med 2010; 7(2): e1000217. Available at: doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000217
43. Cheng A, Hunt EA, Donoghue A, et al. Examining pediatric resuscitation education using simulation and scripted debriefing: a multicenter, randomized-controlled trial. JAMA Pediatr 2013; 167: 528-536
44. Cheng A, Brown LL, Duff JP, et al. Improving cardiopulmonary resuscitation with a CPR feedback device and refresher simulations (CPR CARES Study): a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr 2015; 169(2): 137-144
45. Cheng A, Overly F, Kessler D, et al. Perception of CPR quality: influence of CPR feedback, just-in-Time training and provider role. Resuscitation 2015; 87: 44-50
46. Kessler DO, Arteaga G, Ching K, et al. Interns? success with clinical procedures in infants after simulation training. Pediatrics 2013; 131: e811-e820
47. Gerard JM, Kessler DO, Braun C, et al. Validation of global rating scale and checklist instruments for the infant lumbar puncture procedure. Simul Healthc 2013; 8: 148-154
48. Kessler D, Pusic M, Chang TP, et al. Impact of Just-in-Time and Just-in-Place simulation on intern success with infant lumbar puncture. Pediatrics 2015; 135: e1237-e1246
49. Chang TP, Kessler D, McAninch B, et al. Script concordance testing: assessing residents? clinical decision-making skills for infant lumbar punctures. Acad Med 2014; 89: 128-135
50. Haubner LY, Barry JS, Johnston LC, et al. Neonatal intubation performance: room for improvement in tertiary neonatal intensive care units. Resuscitation 2013; 84: 1359-1364
51. Common guidelines for education research and development. A Report from the Institute for Education Sciences, US Department of Education and the National Science Foundation. Available at: http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub-summ.jsp?ods-key=nsf13126. Accessed January 10, 2015
52. Cobo E, Cortes J, Ribera JM, et al. Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial. BMJ 2011; 343: d6783
53. Egger M, Schneider M, Davey Smith G. Spurious precision?. Meta-Analysis of observational studies. BMJ 1998; 316: 140-144
54. American Education Research Association. Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher 2006; 35: 33-40
55. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. BMJ 2003; 326: 41-44
56. Cook DA, Brydges R, Zendejas B, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation to assess health professionals: a systematic review of validity evidence, research methods, and reporting quality. Acad Med 2013; 88: 872-883
57. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care 2007; 19(6): 349-357
58. Davidoff F, Batalden P, Stevens D, et al. Publication guidelines for improvement studies in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE Project. Ann Intern Med 2008; 149(9): 670-676