creased by 0.47 SDs under active learning (n = 158 studies), and that the odds ratio for failing was 1.95 under traditional lecturing (n = 67 studies). These results indicate that average examination scores improved by about 6% in active learning sections, and that students in classes with traditional lecturing were 1.5 times more likely to fail than were students in classes with active learning. Heterogeneity analyses indicated that both results hold across the STEM disciplines, that active learning increases scores on concept inventories more than on course examinations, and that active learning appears effective across all class sizes—although the greatest effects are in small (n ≤ 50) classes. Trim and fill analyses and fail-safe n calculations suggest that the results are not due to publication bias. The results also appear robust to variation in the methodological rigor of the included studies, based on the quality of controls over student quality and instructor identity. This is the largest and most comprehensive metaanalysis of undergraduate STEM education published to date. The results raise questions about the continued use of traditional lecturing as a control in research studies, and support active learning as the preferred, empirically validated teaching practice in regular classrooms.

/pdf/active-learning-increases-student-performance-in-science-3j0c6wu4k5.pdf

Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics

In systematic reviews and meta-analysis, researchers often pool the results of the sample mean and standard deviation from a set of similar clinical trials. A number of the trials, however, reported the study using the median, the minimum and maximum values, and/or the first and third quartiles. Hence, in order to combine results, one may have to estimate the sample mean and standard deviation for such trials. In this paper, we propose to improve the existing literature in several directions. First, we show that the sample standard deviation estimation in Hozo et al.’s method (BMC Med Res Methodol 5:13, 2005) has some serious limitations and is always less satisfactory in practice. Inspired by this, we propose a new estimation method by incorporating the sample size. Second, we systematically study the sample mean and standard deviation estimation problem under several other interesting settings where the interquartile range is also available for the trials. We demonstrate the performance of the proposed methods through simulation studies for the three frequently encountered scenarios, respectively. For the first two scenarios, our method greatly improves existing methods and provides a nearly unbiased estimate of the true sample standard deviation for normal data and a slightly biased estimate for skewed data. For the third scenario, our method still performs very well for both normal data and skewed data. Furthermore, we compare the estimators of the sample mean and standard deviation under all three scenarios and present some suggestions on which scenario is preferred in real-world applications. In this paper, we discuss different approximation methods in the estimation of the sample mean and standard deviation and propose some new estimation methods to improve the existing literature. We conclude our work with a summary table (an Excel spread sheet including all formulas) that serves as a comprehensive guidance for performing meta-analysis in different situations.

/pdf/estimating-the-sample-mean-and-standard-deviation-from-the-21qt03q3yr.pdf

Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range

https://focus.psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.1176/appi.focus.12.2.192

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of 15 antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis

Background The widespread application pulmonary rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should be preceded by demonstrable improvements in function attributable to the programs. This review updates that reported by Lacasse et al Lancet 1996; 748:1115-1119. Objectives To determine the impact of rehabilitation on health-related quality of life (QoL) and exercise capacity in patients with COPD. Search strategy The 14 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in the original meta-analysis were included. Additional RCTs were identified from the Cochrane Airways Group's registry of COPD RCTs using the strategy: [exp, lung diseases, obstructive] and [exp, rehabilitation or exp, exercise therapy] and [research design or longitudinal studies or evaluation study or randomized controlled trial]. Abstracts presented at American Thoracic Society 1980-2000, American College of Chest Physicians 1980-2000 and European Respiratory Society 1987-2000 were also searched. Selection criteria RCTs of rehabilitation in patients with COPD in which quality of life (QoL) and/or functional (FEC) or maximal (MEC) exercise capacity were measured. Rehabilitation was defined as exercise training for at least 4 weeks with or without education and/or psychological support. Control groups received conventional community care without rehabilitation. Data collection and analysis Weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated using a random-effects model. Missing data from the primary study reports were requested from the authors. Main results 23 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Statistically significant improvements were found for all the outcomes. In three important domains of QoL (Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire scores for Dyspnea, Fatigue and Mastery), the effect was larger than the minimal clinically important difference of 0.5 units using this instrument. For example Dyspnoea score: WMD 0.98 units, 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 0.74 - 1.22 units; n=9 trials. For FEC and MEC, the effect was small and a little below the threshold of clinical significance for the 6- minute walking distance: WMD 49 m, 95% CI: 26 - 72 m; n=10 trials. Reviewer's conclusions Rehabilitation relieves dyspnea and fatigue and enhances patients' sense of control over their condition. These improvements are moderately large and clinically significant. The average improvement in exercise capacity was modest. Rehabilitation forms an important component of the management of COPD.

Pulmonary rehabilitation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Background
The scoping review has become an increasingly popular approach for synthesizing research evidence. It is a relatively new approach for which a universal study definition or definitive procedure has not been established. The purpose of this scoping review was to provide an overview of scoping reviews in the literature.

Methods
A scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework. A search was conducted in four bibliographic databases and the gray literature to identify scoping review studies. Review selection and characterization were performed by two independent reviewers using pretested forms.

Results
The search identified 344 scoping reviews published from 1999 to October 2012. The reviews varied in terms of purpose, methodology, and detail of reporting. Nearly three-quarter of reviews (74.1%) addressed a health topic. Study completion times varied from 2 weeks to 20 months, and 51% utilized a published methodological framework. Quality assessment of included studies was infrequently performed (22.38%).

Conclusions
Scoping reviews are a relatively new but increasingly common approach for mapping broad topics. Because of variability in their conduct, there is a need for their methodological standardization to ensure the utility and strength of evidence. © 2014 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/jrsm.1123

Jpt Higgins

Papers

Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration