Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2017

Lara Zisblatt, Fei Chen, Dawn Dillman, Amy DiLorenzo, Mark MacEachern, Amy Miller Juve, Emily Peeples, Ashley Grantham

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background

Critical appraisals provide a method for establishing the status of an area of study or evaluating the effectiveness of literature within it. The purpose of this study was to review and appraise studies published in 2017 on medical education in anesthesiology and to provide summaries of the highest-quality medical education research articles in the field.

Methods

Three Ovid MEDLINE databases, Embase.com, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and PsycINFO, were searched followed by a manual review of articles published in the highest impact factor journals in both the fields of anesthesiology and medical education. Abstracts were double-screened and quantitative articles subsequently scored by three randomly assigned raters. Qualitative studies were scored by two raters. Two different rubrics were used for scoring quantitative and qualitative studies, both allowed for scores ranging from 1-25.

Results

A total of 864 unique citations were identified through the search criteria. Of those, 62 articles met the inclusion criteria, with 59 quantitative and three qualitative. The top 10 papers with the highest scores were reported and summarized.

Discussion

As the first article to critically review the literature available for education in anesthesiology, we hope that this study will serve as the first manuscript in an annual series that will help individuals involved in anesthesiology education gain an understanding of the highest-quality research in the field. Once this process is repeated, trends can be tracked and serve as a resource to educators and researchers in anesthesiology for years to come.
Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numberdoi:10.7759/cureus.4838
Pages (from-to)e4838
JournalCureus
Volume11
Issue number6
StatePublished - Jun 5 2019

Fingerprint

educational research
education
information center
resources
inclusion
educator
trend

Cite this

Zisblatt, L., Chen, F., Dillman, D., DiLorenzo, A., MacEachern, M., Juve, A. M., ... Grantham, A. (2019). Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2017. Cureus, 11(6), e4838. [doi:10.7759/cureus.4838].

Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2017. / Zisblatt, Lara; Chen, Fei; Dillman, Dawn; DiLorenzo, Amy; MacEachern, Mark; Juve, Amy Miller; Peeples, Emily; Grantham, Ashley.

In: Cureus, Vol. 11, No. 6, doi:10.7759/cureus.4838, 05.06.2019, p. e4838.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Zisblatt, L, Chen, F, Dillman, D, DiLorenzo, A, MacEachern, M, Juve, AM, Peeples, E & Grantham, A 2019, 'Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2017', Cureus, vol. 11, no. 6, doi:10.7759/cureus.4838, pp. e4838.
Zisblatt L, Chen F, Dillman D, DiLorenzo A, MacEachern M, Juve AM et al. Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2017. Cureus. 2019 Jun 5;11(6):e4838. doi:10.7759/cureus.4838.
Zisblatt, Lara ; Chen, Fei ; Dillman, Dawn ; DiLorenzo, Amy ; MacEachern, Mark ; Juve, Amy Miller ; Peeples, Emily ; Grantham, Ashley. / Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2017. In: Cureus. 2019 ; Vol. 11, No. 6. pp. e4838.
@article{eac2406809244d49a37ef88cf8a930d5,
title = "Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2017",
abstract = "BackgroundCritical appraisals provide a method for establishing the status of an area of study or evaluating the effectiveness of literature within it. The purpose of this study was to review and appraise studies published in 2017 on medical education in anesthesiology and to provide summaries of the highest-quality medical education research articles in the field.MethodsThree Ovid MEDLINE databases, Embase.com, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and PsycINFO, were searched followed by a manual review of articles published in the highest impact factor journals in both the fields of anesthesiology and medical education. Abstracts were double-screened and quantitative articles subsequently scored by three randomly assigned raters. Qualitative studies were scored by two raters. Two different rubrics were used for scoring quantitative and qualitative studies, both allowed for scores ranging from 1-25.ResultsA total of 864 unique citations were identified through the search criteria. Of those, 62 articles met the inclusion criteria, with 59 quantitative and three qualitative. The top 10 papers with the highest scores were reported and summarized.DiscussionAs the first article to critically review the literature available for education in anesthesiology, we hope that this study will serve as the first manuscript in an annual series that will help individuals involved in anesthesiology education gain an understanding of the highest-quality research in the field. Once this process is repeated, trends can be tracked and serve as a resource to educators and researchers in anesthesiology for years to come.",
author = "Lara Zisblatt and Fei Chen and Dawn Dillman and Amy DiLorenzo and Mark MacEachern and Juve, {Amy Miller} and Emily Peeples and Ashley Grantham",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "e4838",
journal = "Cureus",
issn = "2168-8184",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Critical Appraisal of Anesthesiology Educational Research for 2017

AU - Zisblatt, Lara

AU - Chen, Fei

AU - Dillman, Dawn

AU - DiLorenzo, Amy

AU - MacEachern, Mark

AU - Juve, Amy Miller

AU - Peeples, Emily

AU - Grantham, Ashley

PY - 2019/6/5

Y1 - 2019/6/5

N2 - BackgroundCritical appraisals provide a method for establishing the status of an area of study or evaluating the effectiveness of literature within it. The purpose of this study was to review and appraise studies published in 2017 on medical education in anesthesiology and to provide summaries of the highest-quality medical education research articles in the field.MethodsThree Ovid MEDLINE databases, Embase.com, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and PsycINFO, were searched followed by a manual review of articles published in the highest impact factor journals in both the fields of anesthesiology and medical education. Abstracts were double-screened and quantitative articles subsequently scored by three randomly assigned raters. Qualitative studies were scored by two raters. Two different rubrics were used for scoring quantitative and qualitative studies, both allowed for scores ranging from 1-25.ResultsA total of 864 unique citations were identified through the search criteria. Of those, 62 articles met the inclusion criteria, with 59 quantitative and three qualitative. The top 10 papers with the highest scores were reported and summarized.DiscussionAs the first article to critically review the literature available for education in anesthesiology, we hope that this study will serve as the first manuscript in an annual series that will help individuals involved in anesthesiology education gain an understanding of the highest-quality research in the field. Once this process is repeated, trends can be tracked and serve as a resource to educators and researchers in anesthesiology for years to come.

AB - BackgroundCritical appraisals provide a method for establishing the status of an area of study or evaluating the effectiveness of literature within it. The purpose of this study was to review and appraise studies published in 2017 on medical education in anesthesiology and to provide summaries of the highest-quality medical education research articles in the field.MethodsThree Ovid MEDLINE databases, Embase.com, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and PsycINFO, were searched followed by a manual review of articles published in the highest impact factor journals in both the fields of anesthesiology and medical education. Abstracts were double-screened and quantitative articles subsequently scored by three randomly assigned raters. Qualitative studies were scored by two raters. Two different rubrics were used for scoring quantitative and qualitative studies, both allowed for scores ranging from 1-25.ResultsA total of 864 unique citations were identified through the search criteria. Of those, 62 articles met the inclusion criteria, with 59 quantitative and three qualitative. The top 10 papers with the highest scores were reported and summarized.DiscussionAs the first article to critically review the literature available for education in anesthesiology, we hope that this study will serve as the first manuscript in an annual series that will help individuals involved in anesthesiology education gain an understanding of the highest-quality research in the field. Once this process is repeated, trends can be tracked and serve as a resource to educators and researchers in anesthesiology for years to come.

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - e4838

JO - Cureus

JF - Cureus

SN - 2168-8184

IS - 6

M1 - doi:10.7759/cureus.4838

ER -