Reporting guidelines for health care simulation research: extensions to the CONSORT and STROBE statements

Advances in Simulation

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2016, Pages

  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 Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons ^*  (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

EID: 85166007396     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20590628     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s41077-016-0025-y     Document Type: Article

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;306:978–88.
2. Zendejas B, Brydges R, Wang AT, et al. Patient outcomes in simulation-based medical education: a systematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28:1078–89. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-012-2264-5
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;90:246–56. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000549
4. Cheng A, Grant V, Auerbach M. Using simulation to improve patient safety: dawn of a new era. JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169:419–20. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2014.3817
5. Cook DA. How much evidence does it take? A cumulative meta-analysis of outcomes of simulation-based education. Med Educ. 2014;48:750–60. DOI: 10.1111/medu.12473
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. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03547.x
7. McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Cohen ER, et al. Translational educational research: a necessity for effective health-care improvement. Chest. 2012;142:1097–103. DOI: 10.1378/chest.12-0148
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. DOI: 10.1080/01421590500046924
9. Cheng A, Lockey A, Bhanji F, et al. The use of high-fidelity manikins for advanced life support training – a systematic review and meta-analysis. Resuscitation. 2015;93:142-9. Accessed 14 Apr 2015.
10. Cheng A, Lang T, Starr S, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation and pediatric education: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics. 2014;133:e1313–23. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2013-2139
11. Cheng A, Eppich W, Grant V, et al. Debriefing for technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ. 2014;48:657–66. DOI: 10.1111/medu.12432
12. Ilgen JS, Sherbino J, Cook DA. Technology-enhanced simulation in emergency medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Emerg Med. 2013;20:117–27. DOI: 10.1111/acem.12076
13. Lorello GR, Cook DA, Johnson RL, et al. Simulation-based training in anaesthesiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2014;112:231–45. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aet414
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;257:586–93. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318288c40b
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;120:1171–82. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12289
16. Cheng A, Auerbach M, Chang T, et al. Designing and conducting simulation-based research. Pediatrics. 2014;133:1091–101. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2013-3267
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:S24–9. DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e318229f5c8
18. Raemer D, Anderson M, Cheng A, et al. Research regarding debriefing as part of the learning process. Simul Healthc. 2011;6:S52–7. DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e31822724d0
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:e867–98. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.714886
20. Glasziou P, Altman DG, Bossuyt P, et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet. 2014;383:267–76. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62228-X
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;41:1074–81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02861.x
22. Cook DA, Beckman TJ, Bordage G. Quality of reporting of experimental studies in medical education: a systematic review. Med Educ. 2007;41:737–45. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02777.x
23. Cook DA, Levinson AJ, Garside S. Method and reporting quality in health professions education research: a systematic review. Med Educ. 2011;45:227–38. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03890.x
24. Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2001;323:42–6. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42
25. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA. 1996;276:637–9. DOI: 10.1001/jama.1996.03540080059030
26. Begley CG, Ioannidis JP. Reproducibility in science: improving the standard for basic and preclinical research. Circ Res. 2015;116:116–26. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.303819
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;357:1191–4. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04337-3
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. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c869
29. Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF. Opportunities and challenges for improving the quality of reporting clinical research: CONSORT and beyond. CMAJ. 2004;171:349–50. DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.1040031
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;185:263–7.
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;147:573–7. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010
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. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297
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. DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
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;151:264–9. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135
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:W65–94. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00136
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 28 May 2015.
37. Golub RM, Fontanarosa PB. Researchers, readers, and reporting guidelines: writing between the lines. JAMA. 2015;313:1625–6. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.3837
38. Campbell MK, Elbourne DR, Altman DG, CONSORT group. CONSORT statement: extension to cluster randomised trials. BMJ. 2004;328:702–8. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.328.7441.702
39. Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Altman DG, et al. Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. JAMA. 2006;295:1152–60. DOI: 10.1001/jama.295.10.1152
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:W60–6.
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;39:247–66. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.2009.02125.x
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;167:528–36. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.1389
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):137–44. DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2014.2616
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. DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2014.11.015
46. Kessler DO, Arteaga G, Ching K, et al. Interns’ success with clinical procedures in infants after simulation training. Pediatrics. 2013;131:e811–20. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2012-0607
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;8:148–54. DOI: 10.1097/SIH.0b013e3182802d34
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:e1237–46. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2014-1911
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;89:128–35. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000059
50. Haubner LY, Barry JS, Johnston LC, et al. Neonatal intubation performance: room for improvement in tertiary neonatal intensive care units. Resuscitation. 2013;84:1359–64. DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2013.03.014
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 10 Jan 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. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.d6783
53. Egger M, Schneider M, Davey Smith G. Spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies. BMJ. 1998;316:140–4. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.316.7125.140
54. American Education Research Association. Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educ Res. 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;326:41–4. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41
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;88:872–83. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31828ffdcf
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):349–57. DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
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):670–6. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-149-9-200811040-00009