Pubrica provides/supports Systematic reviews of implanted medical devices and provides high medical reporting standards.

Our Service
Pubrica Healthcare and Medical Research Experts offer custom scientific research writing and analytics services, with a team of expert researchers and writers on purpose to support you with systematic review writing. We have subject specialists with PhDs who have written scholarly papers for decades. As a result, we can provide a high-quality written literature evaluation. Our specialists are highly comfortable using scientific literature databases, such as PubMed and Medline, to conduct the literature review and have cancer domain experience to select significant journal articles for the review. After each milestone, written status reports will be given, giving an overview of the progress of deliverable completion, including the literature search and environmental scanning specifics.
Although several systematic evaluations of implanted medical devices have been published, there has been no empirical evaluation of the reviews. We critically reviewed the quality of reporting in systematic reviews of implanted medical devices to understand better the technique used, identify current strengths, limits, defects, and particular concerns, and provide recommendations to improve future conduct and reporting. These variables might influence the study’s results.

Our systemic review services include

A systematic review summarises existing research data and gives a high degree of evidence-based findings on the efficacy of treatments. Systematic review services have a well-established position in medical practice and research. Clinicians use systematic reviews to remain current on new data and compare the efficacy of different treatments. Even though many systematic reviews of medical devices have been published, there has been no empirical evaluation of the studies.

A multi-step systematic review identifies a well-focused, clinically relevant research topic and uses appropriate frameworks such as PICO, SPICE, SPIDER, and ECLIPSE. An inclusive literature search of several databases (including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) is required to discover relevant references.

Reporting Strategies for Systematic Reviews of Implantable Medical Devices

When conducting a systematic review of implantable medical devices, it is crucial to develop effective reporting strategies to ensure transparency, reproducibility, and the dissemination of accurate findings. Here are some reporting strategies to consider:

1. PRISMA guidelines

2. Protocol registration

3. Search strategy

4. Study selection

5. Data extraction

6. Risk of bias assessment

7. Data synthesis and presentation

Limitations

By adopting these reporting strategies, you can ensure that your systematic review of implantable medical devices is conducted with rigor, clarity, and transparency, enhancing the credibility and usefulness of your research for the scientific community and healthcare decision-makers.

Quality reporting of implantable medical devices

Quality reporting of implantable medical devices is essential to provide accurate and reliable information to healthcare professionals, patients, regulatory authorities, and researchers. Here are some key considerations for ensuring quality reporting: a) Clear device identification, b) Study design and methodology, c) Outcome measures, d) Adverse events reporting, e) Results presentation, f) Limitations and biases, g) Comparisons and context and h) Transparency and reproducibility.

By adhering to these principles of quality reporting, researchers and authors can contribute to the overall understanding and evaluation of implantable medical devices. Consistent and transparent reporting ensures that healthcare professionals and patients can make informed decisions, regulatory authorities can assess safety and efficacy, and researchers can build upon existing knowledge to advance the field.