scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

St. Michael's GAA, Sligo

About: St. Michael's GAA, Sligo is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Health care. The organization has 3674 authors who have published 3903 publications receiving 118907 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
23 Feb 2016-JAMA
TL;DR: Clinician recognition of ARDS was associated with higher PEEP, greater use of neuromuscular blockade, and prone positioning, which indicates the potential for improvement in the management of patients with ARDS.
Abstract: IMPORTANCE Limited information exists about the epidemiology, recognition, management, and outcomes of patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). OBJECTIVES To evaluate intensive ...

3,259 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This updated review includes 15 studies that measured the effectiveness of IPE interventions compared to no educational intervention and found that seven studies indicated that IPE produced positive outcomes in the following areas: diabetes care, emergency department culture and patient satisfaction.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: The delivery of effective, high-quality patient care is a complex activity. It demands health and social care professionals collaborate in an effective manner. Research continues to suggest that collaboration between these professionals can be problematic. Interprofessional education (IPE) offers a possible way to improve interprofessional collaboration and patient care. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of IPE interventions compared to separate, profession-specific education interventions; and to assess the effectiveness of IPE interventions compared to no education intervention. SEARCH METHODS: For this update we searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register, MEDLINE and CINAHL, for the years 2006 to 2011. We also handsearched the Journal of Interprofessional Care (2006 to 2011), reference lists of all included studies, the proceedings of leading IPE conferences, and websites of IPE organisations. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before and after (CBA) studies and interrupted time series (ITS) studies of IPE interventions that reported objectively measured or self reported (validated instrument) patient/client or healthcare process outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently assessed the eligibility of potentially relevant studies. For included studies, at least two review authors extracted data and assessed study quality. A meta-analysis of study outcomes was not possible due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures. Consequently, the results are presented in a narrative format. MAIN RESULTS: This update located nine new studies, which were added to the six studies from our last update in 2008. This review now includes 15 studies (eight RCTs, five CBA and two ITS studies). All of these studies measured the effectiveness of IPE interventions compared to no educational intervention. Seven studies indicated that IPE produced positive outcomes in the following areas: diabetes care, emergency department culture and patient satisfaction; collaborative team behaviour and reduction of clinical error rates for emergency department teams; collaborative team behaviour in operating rooms; management of care delivered in cases of domestic violence; and mental health practitioner competencies related to the delivery of patient care. In addition, four of the studies reported mixed outcomes (positive and neutral) and four studies reported that the IPE interventions had no impact on either professional practice or patient care. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This updated review reports on 15 studies that met the inclusion criteria (nine studies from this update and six studies from the 2008 update). Although these studies reported some positive outcomes, due to the small number of studies and the heterogeneity of interventions and outcome measures, it is not possible to draw generalisable inferences about the key elements of IPE and its effectiveness. To improve the quality of evidence relating to IPE and patient outcomes or healthcare process outcomes, the following three gaps will need to be filled: first, studies that assess the effectiveness of IPE interventions compared to separate, profession-specific interventions; second, RCT, CBA or ITS studies with qualitative strands examining processes relating to the IPE and practice changes; third, cost-benefit analyses.

1,666 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Consistency in the proposed domains and methodologies of scoped reviews, along with the development of reporting guidance, will facilitate methodological advancement, reduce confusion, facilitate collaboration and improve knowledge translation of scoping review findings.

1,663 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The mechanisms by which platelets contribute to immunity are discussed: these small cells are more immunologically savvy than the authors once thought.
Abstract: Platelets are anucleate cells that are crucial mediators of haemostasis. Most immunologists probably don't think about platelets every day, and may even consider these cells to be 'nuisances' in certain in vitro studies. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that platelets have inflammatory functions and can influence both innate and adaptive immune responses. Here, we discuss the mechanisms by which platelets contribute to immunity: these small cells are more immunologically savvy than we once thought.

1,351 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Oct 2020
TL;DR: The updated JBI guidance for scoping reviews includes additional guidance on several methodological issues, such as when a scoping review is (or is not) appropriate, and how to extract, analyze, and present results, and provides clarification for implications for practice and research.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to describe the updated methodological guidance for conducting a JBI scoping review, with a focus on new updates to the approach and development of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (the PRISMA-ScR). INTRODUCTION: Scoping reviews are an increasingly common approach to informing decision-making and research based on the identification and examination of the literature on a given topic or issue. Scoping reviews draw on evidence from any research methodology and may also include evidence from non-research sources, such as policy. In this manner, scoping reviews provide a comprehensive overview to address broader review questions than traditionally more specific systematic reviews of effectiveness or qualitative evidence. The increasing popularity of scoping reviews has been accompanied by the development of a reporting guideline: the PRISMA-ScR. In 2014, the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group developed guidance for scoping reviews that received minor updates in 2017 and was most recently updated in 2020. The updates reflect ongoing and substantial developments in approaches to scoping review conduct and reporting. As such, the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group recognized the need to revise the guidance to align with the current state of knowledge and reporting standards in evidence synthesis. METHODS: Between 2015 and 2020, the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group expanded its membership; extensively reviewed the literature; engaged via annual face-to-face meetings, regular teleconferences, and email correspondence; sought advice from methodological experts; facilitated workshops; and presented at scientific conferences. This process led to updated guidance for scoping reviews published in the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. The updated chapter was endorsed by JBI's International Scientific Committee in 2020. RESULTS: The updated JBI guidance for scoping reviews includes additional guidance on several methodological issues, such as when a scoping review is (or is not) appropriate, and how to extract, analyze, and present results, and provides clarification for implications for practice and research. Furthermore, it is aligned with the PRISMA-ScR to ensure consistent reporting. CONCLUSIONS: The latest JBI guidance for scoping reviews provides up-to-date guidance that can be used by authors when conducting a scoping review. Furthermore, it aligns with the PRISMA-ScR, which can be used to report the conduct of a scoping review. A series of ongoing and future methodological projects identified by the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group to further refine the methodology are planned.

1,250 citations


Authors

Showing all 3674 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Peter Jüni12159399254
Sharon E. Straus12087972513
Sergio Grinstein11853351452
Arthur S. Slutsky11761073092
David J.A. Jenkins10649141625
Tim J Peters106103747394
John C. Marshall10347183314
Sylvia L. Asa10161139877
Andras Nagy10143152458
Sidney H. Kennedy9855536258
Jean Golding9753340918
Thomas M.S. Wolever9138831323
Robert G. Josse9033029917
John Bienenstock8942629118
Emil H. Schemitsch8654025279
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University of Alabama at Birmingham
86.7K papers, 3.9M citations

80% related

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
76K papers, 3.7M citations

79% related

University of Pittsburgh
201K papers, 9.6M citations

79% related

Tufts University
66.8K papers, 3.4M citations

79% related

Erasmus University Rotterdam
91.2K papers, 4.5M citations

78% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
20223
2021461
2020289
2019220
2018201
2017233