Horsley Tanya, Steinert Yvonne, Leslie Karen, Oswald Anna, Friesen Farah, Ellaway Rachel H
Research Unit, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, Ottawa, Canada.
School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Med Teach. 2020 Oct;42(10):1171-1178. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1798909. Epub 2020 Aug 8.
Knowledge syntheses in medical education are intended to promote the translation to, and mobilization of, research knowledge into practice. Despite the effort invested in conducting them, how these knowledge syntheses are used is unclear. This study aimed to explore how knowledge syntheses published by the Best Evidence Medical Education Collaboration (BEME) have been used in a cross-section of published literature.
Citation patterns for BEME reviews were explored using data drawn from Web of Science and Scopus, and a sub-sample of citing papers.
Bibliometric data on 3419 papers citing 29 BEME reviews were analysed. More detailed data were extracted from a random sample of 629 full-text papers.
BEME reviews were most often positioned to consolidate and summarize the current state of knowledge on a particular topic and to identify gaps in the literature; they were also used to justify current research, and less frequently to contextualize and explain results, or direct future areas of research. Their use to identify instruments or methodological approaches was relatively absent.
While BEME reviews are primarily used to justify and support other studies, the current literature does not demonstrate their translation to educational practice.
医学教育中的知识整合旨在促进研究知识转化并应用于实践。尽管在开展知识整合方面投入了精力,但这些知识整合的使用方式尚不清楚。本研究旨在探讨最佳证据医学教育协作组织(BEME)发表的知识整合在一系列已发表文献中的使用情况。
利用从科学网和Scopus获取的数据以及引用论文的子样本,探索BEME综述的引用模式。
分析了引用29篇BEME综述的3419篇论文的文献计量数据。从629篇全文论文的随机样本中提取了更详细的数据。
BEME综述最常被用于巩固和总结特定主题的知识现状以及识别文献中的空白;它们也被用于为当前研究提供依据,而较少用于将结果置于背景中进行解释或指导未来的研究领域。相对而言,它们较少被用于识别工具或方法学途径。
虽然BEME综述主要用于为其他研究提供依据和支持,但当前文献并未表明它们已转化为教育实践。