Article 3: Systematic Reviews & Evidence-based Cognitive Rehabilitation
Cicerone, et al. (2011). Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: Updated review of the literature 2003 to 2008. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 92(4): 519-530.
In graduate school, one of the best tips that Dr. Michael Biel gave us was this: Use systematic reviews. You may have seen a theme of this so far in the few blog posts I've written up to this point--and it's because I think he was right. Systematic reviews are a wealth of information. Systematic reviews essentially are when a team of experts or one expert chooses a topic, i.e. cognitive rehabilitation, and sets up a system to review several articles on that topic. The criteria for what articles make the cut are usually detailed in the introduction of the review. The criteria might be by year, type of patient, type of therapy, or any number of other criteria selected by the reviewer(s). The reviewer(s) then find patterns in the articles and organize the articles by subtopics. They then make general analysis about the current state of research on that topic i.e. spaced retrieval is a well-proven therapy option for patients with memory issues or there is not enough conclusive evidence on eMST for swallowing disorders at this point.
They provide bites of information that are more easily digestible than the daunting task of reading hundreds of articles. It's an excellent way to get a lot of information in one place and find resources in case you want to read the articles further yourself.
To start you off, I've included the citation for one of my favorites and the ANCDS website https://www.ancds.org/evidence-based-clinical-research with several systematic reviews as they have different teams working on different topics in the field. Cicerone et al. (2011) references specific therapy suggestions by name, article, and population, including for those with TBI, stroke, and aphasia. As well, I really like that this article focuses on relating research to clinical work.
After reading, which you can do by section since they've organized the research very easily, the bibliography provides the most significant research in the cognitive rehab 2003-2008. I've found that knowing names of researchers who are mentioned again and again in systematic reviews can be a great way to limit your searches.
Good luck! Comment if you have questions or your own tips! What do you think about systematic reviews? Do you have a way of limiting your research?
In graduate school, one of the best tips that Dr. Michael Biel gave us was this: Use systematic reviews. You may have seen a theme of this so far in the few blog posts I've written up to this point--and it's because I think he was right. Systematic reviews are a wealth of information. Systematic reviews essentially are when a team of experts or one expert chooses a topic, i.e. cognitive rehabilitation, and sets up a system to review several articles on that topic. The criteria for what articles make the cut are usually detailed in the introduction of the review. The criteria might be by year, type of patient, type of therapy, or any number of other criteria selected by the reviewer(s). The reviewer(s) then find patterns in the articles and organize the articles by subtopics. They then make general analysis about the current state of research on that topic i.e. spaced retrieval is a well-proven therapy option for patients with memory issues or there is not enough conclusive evidence on eMST for swallowing disorders at this point.
They provide bites of information that are more easily digestible than the daunting task of reading hundreds of articles. It's an excellent way to get a lot of information in one place and find resources in case you want to read the articles further yourself.
To start you off, I've included the citation for one of my favorites and the ANCDS website https://www.ancds.org/evidence-based-clinical-research with several systematic reviews as they have different teams working on different topics in the field. Cicerone et al. (2011) references specific therapy suggestions by name, article, and population, including for those with TBI, stroke, and aphasia. As well, I really like that this article focuses on relating research to clinical work.
After reading, which you can do by section since they've organized the research very easily, the bibliography provides the most significant research in the cognitive rehab 2003-2008. I've found that knowing names of researchers who are mentioned again and again in systematic reviews can be a great way to limit your searches.
Good luck! Comment if you have questions or your own tips! What do you think about systematic reviews? Do you have a way of limiting your research?
Comments
Post a Comment