HPHY 212- Lecture 2 on Publications - Winter 2014

Intern  challenge  

What  are  the  top  ar/cles  about  concussions  and  TBI  according  to  

wikipedia?  

Learning  objec/ves    

•  Iden/fy  the  differences  between  a  case  study,  a  scien/fic  study,  a  review  or  a  meta-­‐analysis  for  a  scholarly  ar/cle.    

•  Iden/fy  an  appropriate  search  to  find  more  informa/on  on  the  topic.  

•  Know  how  to  use  FindText  and  Interlibrary  Loan  to  get  ar/cles.  

Intern  challenge    

•  You  are  all  helping  research  being  done  at  University  of  Washington  about  the  long  term  health  impacts  of  concussions  on  athletes.  

•  Started  by  going  through  the  long  list  of  cita/ons  used  in  the  wikipedia  ar/cles  about  concussion  and  TBI.  

•  What  are  the  best  ar/cles  from  those  long  list  of  references?  

Best?  

① Used  wikipedia  to  start  researching  a  topic.  ② Found  sources  as  well  as  bibliometric  

informa/on  about  use  and  impact  (measured  by  /mes  cited/cited  by)  in  GS  and  WoS.  

③ Sort  by  most  cited.  

5  Most  cited  -­‐  concussions  Citaion  number  

Title   Cited  by  (GS)  

7

McCrory, P; Meeuwisse, W; Johnston, K; Dvorak, J; Aubry, M; Molloy, M; Cantu, R (2009 Jul-Aug). "Consensus statement on concussion in sport: the 3rd International Conference on Concussion in Sport held in Zurich, November 2008.". Journal of athletic training 44 (4): 434–48. doi:10.4085/1062-6050-44.4.434. PMC 2707064. PMID 19593427. 835

29 ^ Savitsky EA, Votey SR (2000). "Current controversies in the management of minor pediatric head injuries". American Journal of Emergency Medicine 18 (1): 96–101. doi:10.1016/S0735-6757(00)90060-3. PMID 10674544. 792

74 ^ Alexander MP (1995). "Mild traumatic brain injury: Pathophysiology, natural history, and clinical management". Neurology 45 (7): 1253–60. 728

58 ^ Jump up to: a b c "Facts About Concussion and Brain Injury". Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2006. Retrieved 2008-01-13. 684

34

McCrory P, Johnston K, Meeuwisse W, Aubry M, Cantu R, Dvorak J, Graf-Baumann T, Kelly J, Lovell M, Schamasch P (April 2005). "Summary and agreement statement of the 2nd International Conference on Concussion in Sport, Prague 2004". Br J Sports Med 39 (4): 196–204. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2005.018614. PMC 1725173. PMID 15793085 596

Footnote  chasing  

•  backwards  in  /me  •  WoS  

Pearling  

•  Cites/cited  by  •  Expands  a  search  •  WoS  &  Google  Scholar  

Ar/cle  1  

Ar/cle  2,  cites  ar/cle  1  

Ar/cle  3,  cites  ar/cle  1  or  2  or  both,  etc.  

Hierarchy  of  Evidence    or    

levels  of  evidence    q   Meta-­‐analyses  

q   Review    q   Scien/fic  studies    (e.g.,  cross-­‐sec/onal  vs  longitudinal,  randomised  controlled  trials)  

q   Case  reports    

Hierarchy  of  Evidence  –      

Meta-­‐analyses    

Scien9fic  studies  

Case  studies  

Reviews  

From  concussions  

Meta-­‐analysis  =  12    review  =  28    

scien/fic  study  =  52    case  study  =  11    

Case  Reports  •  Concussion  cita9on  #13  ^  Warden,  Deborah  L.;  French,  Louis  M.;  Shupenko,  Leslie;  Fargus,  Jamie;  Riedy,  Gerard;  Erickson,  Marleigh  E.;  Jaffee,  Michael  S.;  Moore,  David  F.  (2009).  "Case  report  of  a  soldier  with  primary  blast  brain  injury".  NeuroImage  47:  T152–3.  doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.01.060.  PMID  19457364.  

Case  Reports  •  chief  complaint    •  Diagnosis  •  treatment,  and    •  devia9on  from  the  expected  

Observa9ons  ,  not  planned  studies  

Scien9fic  studies    Howell  ar/cle  from  Tuesday  

Concussion  cita/on  #74  

Alexander  MP  (1995).  "Mild  trauma/c  brain  injury:  Pathophysiology,  natural  history,  and  clinical  management".  Neurology  45  (7):  1253–60.  doi:10.1212/WNL.45.7.1253.  PMID  7617178.  

Scien9fic  studies      

includes:    randomized  controlled  trials  

cross-­‐sec/onal  and/or  longitudinal  studies  

In  addi/on  to  the  parts  of  a  scholarly  ar/cle  this  ar/cle  describes  how  the  authors    

Test  a  hypothesis  

A  good  clinical  trial  will  use  these  3  guiding  principles  

 •  Compare  like  with  like  •  The  bigger  the  group  studied  the  more  reliable  the  conclusions  

•  Bayes  theorem:    things  that  should  be  true  and  have  good  suppor/ng  evidence  to  back  them  up,  are  likely  to  be  true  

For  more  details  see  Appendix  1  of:  Greenhalgh  T.  How  to  Read  a  Paper:  The  Basics  of  Evidence-­‐based  Medicine.  3rd  ed.  BMJ  Books;  2006.  

List  some  differences  between  a  case  study  and  a  scien/fic  study.  

List  similari/es.  

Systema/c  Reviews  Reviews  

TBI  #53  Comper  P,  Bisschop  SM,  Carnide  N  et  al.  (2005).  "A  systema/c  review  of  treatments  for  mild  trauma/c  brain  injury".  Brain  Injury  19  (11):  863–880.  doi:10.1080/02699050400025042.  PMID  16296570.  

Systema/c  Reviews  Reviews  

TBI  #99  Turner-­‐Stokes  L,  Disler  PB,  Nair  A,  Wade  DT  (2005).  "Mul/-­‐disciplinary  rehabilita/on  for  acquired  brain  injury  in  adults  of  working  age".  In  Turner-­‐Stokes,  Lynne.  Cochrane  Database  of  Systema9c  Reviews  (3):  CD004170.  doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004170.pub2.  PMID  16034923.  

Systema/c  Reviews  Reviews  

Went  through  literature  and  found  all  ar/cles  on  a  topic.    Similar  to  what  you  might  do  for  a  really  well  researched  term  paper.    Bibliographies  of  these  papers  are  a  goldmine.  

Meta-­‐analysis  

•  hpp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18081367  

•  hpp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20003581  

•  hpp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22609052  

Meta-­‐analysis  

•  Single  focused  ques/on  or  overview  of  several  related  ques/ons  

•  +    data  sources,  study  selec/on,  data  extrac/on,  data  synthesis  

•  An  analysis  of  the  data.    

List  some  similari/es  between  a  review  and    meta-­‐analysis.  

List  some  differences.    

Draw  your  own  schema  for  a    Hierarchy  of  Evidence  

Altmetrics  

#overlyhonestmethods  

Best?  

① Used  wikipedia  to  start  researching  a  topic.  ② Found  bibliometric  informa/on  about  /mes  

cited  in  both  GS  and  WoS.  ③ Sort  by  most  cited.  ④ Consider  Hierarchy  of  evidence.  ⑤ Other  measures?  

hpp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23643687  

Vs.  

hpp://cascade.uoregon.edu/winter2014/natural-­‐sciences/not-­‐so-­‐fast-­‐concussions-­‐and-­‐recovery-­‐/me/  

hpp://www.menshealth.com/health/bad-­‐news-­‐about-­‐your-­‐concussion  

Vs.  

hpp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24371306    

Can  an  ar/cle  be  both  scholarly/peer-­‐reviewed  and  popular/trade*?  

Placebo  effect  

hpp://youtu.be/yfRVCaA5o18  

web  based  EXCEPT  for  the  bibliography  and  iPad  app.  hpp://www.mendeley.com/  

 hpp://www.mendeley.com/videos-­‐tutorials/  

Store  your  stuff  

need  your  own  computer  &  best  with  Firefox  hpps://www.zotero.org/support/quick_start_guide    

 Zotero  vs.  mendeley:  

hpp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53QRA_SNSzE    

all  web  based  hpps://www.myendnoteweb.com  

Based  on  what  we’ve  learned  this  week,  write  a  ques/on  you  would  expect  to  see  on  

the  mid-­‐term.    

hpp://is.gd/HPHY212_intern  Or  

hpps://docs.google.com/forms/d/13PdEQNSXwwACEdKS0CdZPAizQAH4H5_qI7

IW48vpTxc/viewform  

[for  notes  only]  Store  your  stuff:  more  resources  

•  Mendeley  –  web  based  (not  the  bibliography),  also  on  iPad,  need  computer  for  bibliography  part  

hpp://www.mendeley.com/  a  good  intro:  hpp://nursingideas.ca/2010/05/organizing-­‐nursing-­‐research/  and  the  5  minute  intro  in  3  parts  series:    hpp://www.youtube.com/user/MendeleyResearch  •  Endnote  web  –  all  web  pages  hpps://www.myendnoteweb.com  Zotero  and  mendeley:  hpp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53QRA_SNSzE  •  Zotero  –  need  your  own  computer  &  firefox  hpps://www.zotero.org/support/quick_start_guide    Play  the  video  for  some  basics,  and  read  the  basics  info  too