1. BICC/BREC Orientation SessionSunday, August 31Yvonne Steinert Madalena Patricio Antnio Vaz Carneiro

2. Part 1 BREC and BICC collaboration Mutual responsibilityPart 2Introduction to BICCs The McGill BICC A Case Study Reviewing Protocols andComplete Reviews Moving forward 3. BREC / BICC collaborationHandling processFacilitating tools Checklist to support reviewers Master flow sheetThe way forward 4. BREC / BICC collaborationBEMECollaboration 5. BoardThe Boards overallresponsibility is for thestrategic developmentand co-ordination ofcurrent activities.BEMECollaborationBREC / BICCcollaboration 6. BoardBREC BEMEBRECs responsibility is tothe BEME Board forreviewing, monitoring,and guiding BEMEreviews under the process.CollaborationBREC / BICCcollaboration 7. BICCs responsibility is forprogressing the ongoingwork of the BEMECollaboration and planning forits further development.BoardBRECBICCsBEMECollaborationBREC / BICCcollaboration 8. The responsibility of theCongress is for advising theBoard with regard to currentactivities, policy, and futuredirections for the BEMEcollaboration.BoardBRECBICCsBEMECollaborationBREC / BICCcollaborationCongress 9. The responsibility of reviewgroups is to register andundertake a review of anagreed review topic relating toeducation in the healthprofessions.BoardBRECBICCsBEMECollaborationBREC / BICCcollaborationCongressReviewGroups 10. AMEE provides academicand administrative supportfor BEME and providesfacilities for BEME at itsannual meeting and forpublishing BEME reviews.Board AMEEBRECBICCsBEMECollaborationBREC / BICCcollaborationCongressReviewGroups 11. Board AMEEBRECBICCsBEMECollaborationCongressReviewGroupsBREC / BICC collaboration 12. Antnio Vaz CarneiroUniversity of LisbonMadalena PatricioUniversity of LisbonDiana DolmansMaastricht UniversityTrevor GibbsAMEEMorris GordonUniversity of CentralLancashire/Blackpool VictoriaHospitalLarry GruppenUniversity of MichiganSimon GuildSt Andrews UniversityBarry IssenbergUniversity of MiamiYvonne SteinertMcGill UniversityJill ThistlethwaiteAustraliaAndrei AchimasIuliu Hatieganu University ofMedicine and PharmacyNehad El-SawiAlabama College ofOsteopathic MedicineChris GreenConsortium of Universities ofBirmingham, Bournemouth,Essex, and East AngliaSara Mortaz HejriTehran University of MedicalSciencesMark NewmanUniversity College of Londonand Institute of EducationTeresa PawlikowskaRoyal College of SurgeonsJenny SchaferUniversity of QueenslandSusan van SchalkwykStellenbosch UniversityFaculty of Medicine andHealth SciencesDavid TaylorUniversity of Liverpool Schoolof MedicineRochell TractenbergGeorgetown UniversityMedical Centre/SamueliInstituteAliston WhelanWashington University Schoolof Medicine, St Louis 13. Maastricht University, The NetherlandsMcGill University, CanadaSt Andrews University, UKUniversity of Michigan, USAUniversity of Queensland, AustraliaUCLAN/Blackpool Victoria Hospital, UKUniversity of Liverpool, UKLondon BICC, UKConsortium of Universities of Birmingham, Bournemouth, Essex and East Anglia, UKRoyal College of Surgeons, IrelandKings College, London/University of Washington, Seattle, USATehran University of Medical Sciences, IranGeorgetown University, USAStellenbosch University, South AfricaWashington University, Saint Louis, USAIuliu Hatieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, RomaniaAlabama College of Osteopathic Medicine, USAAberdeen Patient Safety Consortium, UKorignew 14. BEMEDundee,Scotland, UKThe BEME office, withLouise Russell as theBEME Administrator, iscrucial for the good andeasy articulation ofBREC and BICCsLouiseRussell 15. BEMEDundee,Scotland, UKThe BEME website anddatabase are crucial tosupport the mutualresponsibility of thehandling process 16. BREC / BICC collaborationHandling processFacilitating toolsThe way forward 17. Handling processIs structured in 10 steps 18. Handlingprocess11. Selecting atopic2. Form a reviewgroup3. Registering atopic4. Protocol5. Pilot review6. Progressreporting7. Submit acompletedreview8. Publicationprocess9. Update review10. Discussionforum2345679810 19. How does collaboration occur inpractice between BREC and BICC?Let us look at the exampleof a protocol 20. ProtocolProtocol allocationBREC 21. ProtocolProtocol allocation Protocol acceptanceBICC 22. ProtocolProtocol allocation Protocol acceptancePaperwork sent toBICC BREC 23. ProtocolProtocol allocation Protocol acceptancePaperwork sent toBICCProtocol to be sentto three independentreviewersBICC 24. ProtocolProtocol allocation Protocol acceptanceBICCPaperwork sent toBICCProtocol to be sentto three independentreviewersComments receivedfrom reviewers 25. ProtocolProtocol allocation Protocol acceptancePaperwork sent toBICCProtocol to be sentto three independentreviewersComments receivedfrom reviewersBICCrecommendationbased on commentsby reviewers to besent to BRECBICC 26. ProtocolProtocol allocation Protocol acceptancePaperwork sent toBICCEndorsement byBREC membersProtocol to be sentto three independentreviewersComments receivedfrom reviewersBICCrecommendationbased on commentsby reviewers to besent to BRECBREC 27. Where there is a clearrecommendation from the BICCand a consensus of the reviewersBRECMembers of the committee will be invitedto endorse the decision with informationmade available to themMembers of the committee may choosenot to look at the documentation, but ifthey wish to do so information isavailableIf no consensus is achieved, a decision ismade by voting Chair has a casting vote 28. Where there were problems with areview or a lack of consensusabout a decisionBRECReview should be referred to BREC for awider discussion and agreement as towhat should be done. BREC forum will beused for getting consensus and a webmeeting is arranged when neededIt is hoped that only a small number ofreviews will fall into this category 29. ProtocolProtocol allocation Protocol acceptancePaperwork sent toBICCEndorsement byBREC membersBREC decisionProtocol to be sentto three independentreviewersComments receivedfrom reviewersBICCrecommendationbased on commentsby reviewers to besent to BRECBREC 30. ProtocolProtocol allocation Protocol acceptancePaperwork sent toBICCEndorsement byBREC membersBREC decisionInformation to besent to authorsProtocol to be sentto three independentreviewersComments receivedfrom reviewersBICCrecommendationbased on commentsby reviewers to besent to BRECBREC 31. ProtocolBRECInformation to besent to authorsProtocoldecisionYESProtocolaccepted asit standsProtocoldecisionNOProtocol isnot acceptedProtocoldecisionYES, butProtocol mustbe revised andresubmittedProtocoldecisionUNCERTAINFurtherdiscussion/approval isneeded byBREC members 32. ProtocolProtocoldecisionYES, butProtocolmust berevised andresubmittedMinor ChangesIf minor changes arerequested, BICC candecide on progressMajor ChangesIf major changes arerequested,BICC/BRECprocedures arerepeatedBICCBREC BICC 33. How is the BRECs finaldecision made?Who is responsible for what?BREC 34. The BREC, as a committee, isresponsible for decisions withregard to systematic reviewsRegistrationof a reviewAcceptanceof a protocolAcceptanceof a finalreport /publicationBREC 35. Responsibility of the handling processwill be delegated to a BICC who isresponsible for the work of the BRECthrough the BREC representativea lead role Following anagreed reviewprocessRecommendationto BREC is madeat protocol andfinal review stepsBICC 36. BREC members are requested toendorse the BREC decision atthree points:Topic registrationProtocolSubmit a completed reviewBICCBREC 37. BREC / BICC collaborationHandling processFacilitating toolsThe way forward 38. 12 sections1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 39. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 40. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 41. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of reviewand key words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 42. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 43. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 44. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 45. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 46. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer toresearch and practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 47. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 48. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 49. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 50. 1. Lead author, team, title, and abstract2. Background to the topic3. Review questions/objectives, type of review andkey words4. Study selection criteria5. Search sources and strategies6. Extracting data7. Appraisal of studies8. Synthesis of evidence and transfer to researchand practice9. Time frame10. Human and material resources11. Overall assessment12. Recommendation / Final decision 51. What is expected fromreviewers? Confidential comments to the leadBICC and BREC Comments which can be forwardedas they stand to the systematic reviewgroupAbove all Clear recommendation (acceptanceas it stands/ accepted withminor/major changes, not accepted) 52. The checklist for reviewers is JUST a support toolIts a dynamic document so any suggestions forimprovement are most welcomedTherefore, feedback is expected from reviewers 53. 10 sectionsEach corresponding to astep in the handling process 54. BICC To describe who, what, and whenconcerning each stage of asystematic review To set the deadline for each stage To indicate appropriatestandardized letter(s) for each stage(which will be made available to allBREC members asap) 55. All relevant materialconcerning reviews underprocess will be availablefor BREC members on theBEME website / databaseor through Dropbox.This system is underprocess and will becommunicated to all BRECmembers when available.Only Confidentialcomments sent byreviewers will haverestricted access. 56. A full set ofstandardized letters willbe available for BRECmembers to use byclicking on the SL# onthe master flow sheet.Each BICCrepresentative canadapt the text to his/herown convenience. 57. BREC / BICC collaborationHandling processFacilitating toolsThe way forward 58. BREC is responsible to theBEME Board for reviewing,monitoring, and guidingBEME reviews under theprocessBICCs are responsible forprogressing the ongoingwork of the BEMECollaboration and planning forits further developmentBRECBICC 59. 26 60. 43 61. After registration and protocolare accepted, AMEE iscommitted to publish thereview Publication depends on thesuccessful achievement of allsteps of the handling process 62. The BEME peer reviewprocess is different from peerreview in other journals BEME is committed to supportauthors throughout thehandling process for asuccessful systematic review 63. The right balance between highquality/exigency and high support fromBREC and BICCs is difficult to achieve,but must be pursued BEME achieved a new level in thecomplex area of secondary research andwe believe it can take a leading roleworldwide The collaboration of BREC and BICCs isa key element for this success.Therefore, BREC counts on the BICCsand the BICCs count on us. 64. BICC/BREC Orientation SessionSunday, August 31Yvonne Steinert Madalena Patricio Antnio Vaz Carneiro