• Users Online: 470
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
EDITORIAL
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 1-2

Training module for capacity building to conduct systematic reviews in dentistry


Department of Public Health Dentistry, Dr. D. Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune, Maharashtra, India

Date of Web Publication23-Apr-2019

Correspondence Address:
Pradnya Kakodkar
Department of Public Health Dentistry, Dr. D. Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jdrr.jdrr_15_19

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Kakodkar P. Training module for capacity building to conduct systematic reviews in dentistry. J Dent Res Rev 2019;6:1-2

How to cite this URL:
Kakodkar P. Training module for capacity building to conduct systematic reviews in dentistry. J Dent Res Rev [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Aug 19];6:1-2. Available from: http://www.jdrr.org/text.asp?2019/6/1/1/256803





Treatment planning for the patients should follow evidence-based practice (EBP), which means using the best, research-proven assessments and treatment in our day-to-day client care and service delivery. The evidence-based decision-making is based on the following 3 core components: first, the health-care provider expertise and his personal experience, second, the evidence drawn from systematic review (SR), randomized control trials, and clinical practice guidelines, and third, the patient preferences (what does the patient really want when given several different options). SRs integrate existing information and provide data for rational decision-making by providing systematically generated scientific evidence for policy briefs.[1]

A SR is a review of the evidence on a clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, and critically appraise relevant primary research, and to extract and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review. SRs top the “evidence pyramid” by generating level 1 evidence due to rigorous methodology (adopted and a priori outlined in the protocol), and relatively large sample size achieved by pooling data from a set of studies.[2]

During the former years, library dissertation for a dental postgraduate student meant writing a narrative review on a selected topic. However, with the changing times, universities are now adopting the concept of undertaking SR as part of the library dissertation for the dental postgraduate students. However, the challenge here is that limited dental faculties have the skills and training to undertake SR and further guide the postgraduate students.

The training module for the postgraduate student for SR learning has been designed. This module detailed here can be followed for training in non-Cochrane SR. The module is a combination of 2-day workshop and six reinforcement sessions once every month with a target to complete the SR in a period of 1 year.

The 2-day workshop should cover training in the topics such as introduction and sensitization to EBP/EBM, discuss the steps in conducting SR, protocol writing, literature search, data extraction, critical appraisal tools, analysis of results, and report writing. Hands-on experience should be given during the workshop to write a protocol.

The following are the steps to be followed in undertaking SR:

0. Decide the uncertainty

1. Deciding the topic and formulating the research question

2. Prepare the protocol

3. Making a list of keywords/search strategy/literature search

4. Selection of studies

5. Extraction of data

6. Assessment of the study quality

7. Analyze and interpret results

8. Prepare the report.

Instead of bombarding the postgraduate students with all the steps in one go, the learning needs to happen in a stepwise manner by reinforcement of one- or two-step at a time. The faculty (trainer) should assign them to work, give them about 3–4 weeks, and check the completed work and further, reinforce the next step. In this systematic manner, the learning can happen effectively and step-by-step [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Reinforcement sessions (conducted regularly at 1-month interval)

Click here to view


For protocol writing, PRIMA-P (17 items) checklist can be followed, and for reporting the SR, the PRISMA-27 item checklist should be followed. PRISMA is used for transparent reporting of SRs and meta-analysis. Those items related to meta-analysis in the checklist can be omitted.

It is advised to register your protocol with PROSPERO (International prospective register of SR). SR should be registered at inception (i.e., at the protocol stage) to help avoid unplanned duplication and to enable comparison of reported review methods with what was planned in the protocol.

This module has been presently implemented at Dr. D. Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Pimpri, Pune, since 2015 for training the postgraduate students for undertaking SR.



 
  References Top

1.
Glover J, Izzo D, Odato K, Wang L. EBM Pyramid and EBM Page Generator@. Trustees of Dartmouth College and Yale University; 2006. Available from: http://www.libguides.indstate.edu/ebp. [Last accessed on 2019 Mar 14].  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Sinha A, Shah D, Tharyan P. Building capacity of Indian scientists to conduct systematic reviews in child health: An ICMR initiative. Indian Pediatr 2015;52:195-8.  Back to cited text no. 2
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
References
Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed581    
    Printed88    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded128    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]