DGM Research & Consulting

Resources

We’ve set up this page to pull together the various resources we use most frequently. We cover databases, protocol standards, reporting guidelines, style guides, and more. There is a lot here, so take it in small bites.

If you decide to contact us for an initial consultation, you might find our first meeting more valuable if you’ve reviewed some of this material first to have it fresh in your mind. You don’t need to decide anything ahead of time; you just might find our first meeting a little more productive if we start out with the same vocabulary.

Protocols & Reporting Guidelines

There are nearly 700 documented research protocols and reporting guidelines in the health sciences used by various journals, editorial boards, research organizations, universities, professional associations, and others. If you’re having trouble zeroing in on the best fit for your research project, we can help.

Below, we’ve put together a very focused, curated list of the most widely used research protocols and reporting guidelines. In our experience, these work the best by far for most research studies, albeit with some occasional minor tweaking. If you want to look for something more specific to your work, we can search the EQUATOR Network, a repository of those 700 protocols and reporting guidelines.

If you choose the PRISMA-P protocol standard, you should choose the PRISMA reporting guidelines.  They were developed together, so they integrate very tightly for a smooth writing experience.

PRISMA-P Checklist in PDF (opens in browser), or an editable version in Word (downloads).

PRISMA Flow Diagrams.  These diagrams apply to PRISMA and its extensions.  Not all items apply to all types of extensions or studies.  They are in Word format so that you may edit them.

PRISMA Flow Diagrams for studies that rely on searching databases and registers only:

  • PRISMA Flow Diagram for new systematic reviews (Word, downloads)
  • PRISMA Flow Diagram for updated systematic reviews (Word, downloads)

PRISMA Flow Diagrams for studies that rely on searching databases, registers, and other resources:

  • PRISMA Flow Diagram for new systematic reviews (Word, downloads)
  • PRISMA Flow Diagram for updated systematic reviews (Word, downloads)

These articles explain why and how the standard was developed.  If you use this protocol, you must cite it; please capture the citation information from the articles themselves.  The authors refer you to these free articles from BMJ to provide guidelines on how to implement the PRISMA-P protocol.

Statement Paper

  • Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1

Explanation & Elaboration Paper

  • Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA, the PRISMA-P Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 2015;349:g7647. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g7647

PRISMA-P is an extension of the PRISMA Publication Standard document.  Teams of subject matter experts update PRISMA and its 16 extensions periodically.  The PRISMA Executive Board is responsible for PRISMA and its extensions.  The board is currently composed of scholars from Australia, Canada, the UK, and the US.

If you choose the SPIRIT protocol standard, you should also choose the CONSORT reporting guidelines.  They were developed together, so they integrate very tightly for a smooth writing experience.

  • SPIRIT Checklist (Word, downloads)
  • SPIRIT Expanded Checklist (PDF, opens in browser)
  • SPIRIT Flow Diagram (Word, downloads)

These articles explain why and how the standard was developed.  If you use this protocol, you must cite it; please capture the citation information from the articles themselves.  The authors refer you to these free articles from BMJ to provide guidelines on how to implement the SPIRIT Protocol.

Statement Paper

  • Chan AW, Boutron I, Hopewell S, Moher D, Schulz KF, Collins GS, et al. SPIRIT 2025 statement: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials. BMJ. 2025;389:e081477. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-081477

Explanation & Elaboration Paper

  • Hróbjartsson A, Boutron I, Hopewell S, Moher D, Schulz KF, Collins GS, et al. SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials. BMJ. 2025;389:e081660. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-081660

One organization, SPIRIT-CONSORT, is responsible for both the SPIRIT protocol standard and the CONSORT reporting guidelines.  Both are periodially udpated by subject matter experts.  The SPIRIT-CONSORT Group is made up of 35 scholars from around the world.  The current Executive Group is responsible for directing the work of the subject matter experts.  The Executive Group is made up of scholars and scientists from Canada, Denmark, France, the UK, and the US.

  • CARE Checklist (PDF)
  • CARE Checklist (HTML, via the CARE website)

Because of the unique nature of each case report, flow diagrams do not apply.

These articles explain why and how these writing guidelines were developed.  If you use them, you must cite them; please capture the citation information from the articles themselves.  The authors refer you to these free articles from BMJ and Journal of Clinical Epidemiology to provide information on how to implement the CARE reporting guidelines.

CARE Statement Paper

  • Gagnier JJ, Kienle G, Altman DG, et al. The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development. BMJ Case R. Oct 23 2013. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2013-201554

CARE Explanation & Elaboration Paper

  • Riley DS, Barber MS, Kienle GS, et al. CARE guidelines for case reports: explanation and elaboration document. J Clin Epidemiol. Sept 2017;89:218-235. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.04.026

The CARE website does not provide information about the governance or who is responsible for updating the CARE reporting guidelines.

Case reports are generally considered one of the lowest levels of evidence, and patient treatment should not be based on similar individual cases.  However, case reports get information out into the wider medical and scientific community, so they should not be overlooked.  Enough case reports may well add up to an interesting research question.

The CARE: Case Report Guidelines website is rich with guidance for writing and submitting case reports.  If you are considering writing a case report, please consult the CARE website first for their clear, structured guidance.  Then please consult us for a literature search.  If your case report is for a little-known issue, it is often harder to find information than it is to find information about well-known conditions.  This type of search is much more like “proving a negative” because of the lengths you have to go to to demonstrate that your case is truly unique and therefore worth publishing.

If you choose the CONSORT reporting guidelines, you should also choose the SPIRIT protocol standard.  They were developed together, so they integrate very tightly for a smooth writing experience.

  • CONSORT Checklist (Word, downloads)
  • CONSORT Expanded Checklist (PDF, opens in browser)
  • CONSORT Flow Diagram (Word, downloads)

These articles explain why and how the reporting guidelines were developed.  If you use these guidelines, you must cite them; please capture the citation information from the articles themselves.  The authors refer you to these free articles from BMJ to provide information on how to implement the CONSORT reporting guidelines.

CONSORT Statement Paper

  • Hopewell S, Chan AW, Collins GS, Hróbjartsson A, Moher D, Schulz KF, et al. CONSORT 2025 statement: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials. BMJ. 2025; 388:e081123. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-081123

CONSORT Explanation & Elaboration Paper

  • Hopewell S, Chan AW, Collins GS, Hróbjartsson A, Moher D, Schulz KF, et al. CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials. BMJ. 2025; 388:e081124. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2024-081124

One organization, SPIRIT-CONSORT, is responsible for both the SPIRIT protocol standard and the CONSORT reporting guidelines.  Both are periodially udpated by subject matter experts.  The SPIRIT-CONSORT Group is made up of 35 scholars from around the world.  The current Executive Group is reponsible for directing the work of the subject matter experts.  The Executive Group is made up of scholars and scientists from Canada, Denmark, France, the UK, and the US.

This article provides the checklist and statement paper for the COREQ reporting guidelines.  It is behind a paywall at Oxford University Press.  The link will take you to the abstract.

  • Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2007;19(6):349-357. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042

This article provides the checklist and statement paper for the COREQ writing guidelines.  It is behind a paywall at Oxford University Press.  The link will take you to the abstract.

  • Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2007;19(6):349-357. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042

There is no information about governance or updates to the COREQ reporting guidelines.

If you choose the PRISMA reporting guideline, you should choose the PRISMA-P protocol standard.  They were developed together, so they integrate very tightly for a smooth writing experience.

  • PRISMA Checklist (Word, downloads)
  • PRISMA Expanded Checklist (PDF, opens in browser)
  • Examples of good responses to PRISMA Checklist items (PDF, opens in browser)

PRISMA Flow Diagrams.  These diagrams apply to PRISMA and its extensions.  Not all items apply to all types of extensions or studies.  They are in Word format so that you may edit them.

PRISMA Flow Diagrams for studies that rely on searching databases and registers only:

  • PRISMA Flow Diagram for new systematic reviews (Word, downloads)
  • PRISMA Flow Diagram for updated systematic reviews (Word, downloads)

PRISMA Flow Diagrams for studies that rely on searching databases, registers, and other resources:

  • PRISMA Flow Diagram for new systematic reviews (Word, downloads)
  • PRISMA Flow Diagram for updated systematic reviews (Word, downloads)

These articles explain why and how the writing guideline was developed.  If you use the PRISMA writing guidelines, you must cite them; please capture the citation information from the articles themselves.  The authors refer you to these free articles from BMJ to provide guidelines on how to implement the PRISMA writing guidelines.

PRISMA Statement Paper

  • Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71

PRISMA Explanation & Elaboration Paper

  • Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n160. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n160

PRISMA is a foundational standard for reporting research results. PRISMA-P (See the Protocol section of this website) is an extension of the PRISMA standard.  PRISMA is updated periodically by subject matter experts.  PRISMA and its extensions are governed by the PRISMA Executive Board.  The board is currently composed of scholars from Australia, Canada, the US, and the UK.

  • SQUIRE Checklist (PDF, opens in browser)

SQUIRE Statement Paper

  • Ogrinc G, Davies L, Goodman D, Batalden P, Davidoff F, Stevens D. SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process. BMJ Qual Saf. Dec 2016:25(12):986-992. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004411

SQUIRE Explanation & Elaboration Paper

  • Goodman D, Ogrinc G, Davies L, Baker GR, Barnsteiner J, Foster TC, Gali K, Hilden J, Horwitz L, Kaplan HC, Leis J. Explanation and elaboration of the SQuIRE (Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence) Guidelines, V. 2.0: examples of SQuIRE elements in the healthcare improvement literature. BMJ Qual Saf. Dec 2016;25(12):e7. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004480

SQUIRE is maintained by the Centre for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety (CQuIPS) at the University of Toronto and three of its teaching hospitals.

The SQUIRE Team consists of three faculty members at the University of Toronto and its teaching hospitals.

This checklist was originally published as appendices in the Statement Paper.  The link below will take you to the Supplemental Digital Content, a downloadable PDF of the appendices.

Supplemental Digital Content (PDF, opens in browser)

  • Note:  This includes the SRQR checklist, as well as examples for filling it out.

This article explains why and how the reporting guidelines were developed.  If you use these guidelines, you must cite them; please capture the citation information from the article itself.  The authors refer you to this free article from Academic Medicine to provide information on how to implement the SRQR reporting guidelines.

SRQR Statement Paper

  • O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. Sep 2014;89(9):1245–51. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000388

There is no information on governance or updates.

STROBE provides multiple checklists to address specific types of studies.

Note:  These links will download the PDF files, but you must open them separately outside your browser.

  • STROBE Checklist for cohort studies (PDF, downloads)
  • STROBE Checklist for case-control studies (PDF, downloads)
  • STROBE Checklist for cross-sectional studies (PDF, downloads)
  • STROBE Checklist for conference abstracts (PDF, downloads)

Please note that STROBE has many more specific extensions.  Visit the STROBE website to view them.

Example

  • RECORD : Reporting of Studies Conducted Using Observational, Routinely-Collected Health Data, via PLoS Medicine at doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001885

These articles explain why and how the STROBE reporting guidelines were developed. If you use these guidelines, you must cite them; please capture the citation information from the articles themselves. The authors refer you to these free articles from BMJ and Epidemiology to provide information on how to implement the STROBE reporting guidelines.

STROBE Statement Paper

  • von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ. October 2007;335:806. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39335.541782.AD

STROBE Explanation & Elaboration Paper.

  • Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Epidemiology. Nov 2007;18(6):805–35. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181577511

The STROBE website does not list a governing body.  It lists 13 (primary) contributors and 35 additional contributors, representing Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, The Netherlands, South Africa, Switzerland, UK, and US.  The STROBE website also shows that the contact information is handled by the University of Bern in Switzerland.

The EQUATOR Network (Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research) is a collaboration among many different organizations.  Their mission is to cover all areas of health research for all nations.  They serve as a “one stop shop” for those seeking guidelines to develop protocols, as well as those seeking reporting guidelines in the health sciences.

EQUATOR participants include universities, editorial organizations, publishers, funding bodies, regulatory bodies, and more.  The Executive and Advisory groups represent Australia, Canada, China, Croatia, France, the UK, and the US.

Because they are an umbrella organization, they are not directly responsible for producing or updating various standards.  They support and facilitate the organizations that produce protocol and reporting guidelines.

Style Guides

Style guides give authors a structure for producing manuscripts, citations, and references. Well known style guides include APA and AMA. In the life sciences, many journal base their required styles on one of these.

This is a curated list of the style guides you’re most likely to need for your manuscript. If you’re just looking to get one or two references into the correct style, there are plenty of reference generators on the internet that will get you pretty close… but they’re not perfect; for example, they don’t always catch capitalization and spacing errors. Remember: garbage in, garbage out! If you’re producing a professional manuscript, just spend the € 30 or € 40 to get your own copy of the official style guide. (We are not affiliates, so we do not make any money from these links. They are here purely for your convenience.)

The different style guides sometimes use different terms to mean the same thing.  On this website, we are going to use these terms as defined below.

Citations:  These are the in-text citations that you insert into sentences and paragraphs to draw the reader’s attention to other works for further information.  They can be superscript numbers, numbers in brackets, names in parentheses, or something else.

References:  These provide the full publishing information of the sources you cite in the manuscript.  They include all the information necessary for the reader to retrieve the article that you cited in the text.  You will see Bibliography or References or Reference List as a heading at the end of the manuscript, followed by a list of all the resources you referred to in your own study.

Footnotes:  Some style guides prefer the use of footnotes on each page to give the reader the publishing information just below your citation in the text. This is becoming less common, but check your style guide for further guidance when they are called for.

Note:  Figures, Tables, Images, Charts, and more terms are also used by style guides.  Check your style guide for further guidance on how to apply these terms in your manuscript.

The proper name for the American Medical Association (AMA) Style is the AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors.  The 11th edition from 2020 is still the current edition.  Updates are published online.  If you are going to use AMA Style, you will want to purchase an online copy that is continuously updated as changes are made to the style.

The proper name for APA Style is the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association.  The 7th edition from 2020 is still the current edition, although updates are published online.  If you are going to write using APA Style, you may want to purchase your own copy.  You can purchase online or in print.

The proper name for NLM Style is Citing Medicine: The NLM Style Guide for Authors, Editors, and Publishers.  The 2nd edition from 2007 is still the current edition.

This is available as a free e-book at the US National Library of Medicine.

References allow readers to review the articles your work is based on. The point of them is to make it as easy as possible for readers to track down the sources you’ve cited.  Most references include the same or similar information. Style guides standardize the reference format so that readers of a journal can consistently identify the information quickly and easily.

We have selected one journal article retrieved online and one website to demonstrate the variations in how the style guides treat them.  Pay particular attention to the use of capitals, italics, abbreviations, punctuation, spacing, and the type of information included.

We start by comparing the article and website citation styles across AMA, APA, and NLM.  (The citation styles for articles and websites are largely identical.)  Then we compare the article references across AMA, APA, and NLM.  Finally we compare the website references across AMA, APA, and NLM.

JOURNAL ARTICLE & WEBSITE CITATIONS

Article used in example:  Efficacy and Safety of Semaglutide for Weight Loss in Obesity Without Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (from the Journal of the ASEAN Federation of Endocrine Societies)

Website used in example: Health Benefits of Semaglutide Beyond Weight Loss (from the Mayo Clinic patient education portal)

AMA Style

“… the safety profile for semaglutide is based on eight longitudinal studies,1 whereas…”

APA Style

“… the safety profile for semaglutide is based on eight longitudinal studies (Tan, Dampil & Marquez, 2022), whereas…”

NLM Style

“… the safety profile for semaglutide is based on eight longitudinal studies,1 whereas…”

JOURNAL ARTICLE REFERENCES

AMA Style

1. Tan HC, Dampil OA, Marquez MM. Efficacy and safety of semaglutide for weight loss in obesity without diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J ASEAN Fed Endocr Soc. 2022;37(2):65-72. doi:10.15605/jafes.037.02.14

APA Style

Tan, H. C., Dampil, O. A., & Marquez, M. M. (2022). Efficacy and safety of semaglutide for weight loss in obesity without diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the ASEAN Federation of Endocrine Societies, 37(2), 65–72. https://doi.org/10.15605/jafes.037.02.14

Note: APA Style calls for a hanging indent of one-half inch after the first line.

NLM Style

1.  Tan HC, Dampil OA, Marquez MM. Efficacy and Safety of Semaglutide for Weight Loss in Obesity Without Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J ASEAN Fed Endocr Soc. 2022;37(2):65-72. doi: 10.15605/jafes.037.02.14. Epub 2022 Aug 23. PMID: 36578889; PMCID: PMC9758543.

WEBSITE REFERENCES

AMA Style

1.     Lisa Buss Preszler. Health benefits of semaglutide — Beyond weight loss – Mayo Clinic Press. Mayo Clinic Press. Published July 2, 2024. Accessed July 5, 2025. https://mcpress.mayoclinic.org/living-well/health-benefits-of-semaglutide-beyond-weight-loss/

APA Style

Lisa Buss Preszler. (2024, July 2). Health benefits of semaglutide — Beyond weight loss. Mayo Clinic Press. https://mcpress.mayoclinic.org/living-well/health-benefits-of-semaglutide-beyond-weight-loss/

Note: APA Style calls for a hanging indent of three spaces for every line after the first line.

NLM Style

1. Preszler LB. Health benefits of semaglutide – beyond weight loss [Internet]. Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research; 2025 [cited 2025 Jul 3]. Available from: https://mcpress.mayoclinic.org/living-well/health-benefits-of-semaglutide-beyond-weight-loss/

Databases

There is no master database of medical, pharmaceutical, or biotech information. That information is spread out over hundreds of different databases, journals, reports, professional associations, poster presentations, conference proceedings, and prepublication manuscripts. Further, most of that information is proprietary and locked behind paywalls. Unless you know where to search, how to search, and how to filter the results, you can never be confident that you’ve found everything you need on your topic.

The databases and other resources listed here are those that we use most frequently. We have experience and training in all of them, so we know where to look and how to find the information you need.

PubMed® comprises more than 38 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.

MEDLINE is a subset of PubMed.  It is a curated set of peer-reviewed journals in the life sciences, behavioral sciences, chemical sciences, and bioengineering.

In addition to MEDLINE, PubMed also includes PubMed Central, a full-text archive of many of the articles indexed in PubMed when permitted/required by funding bodies.

Further, PubMed also includes the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) Bookshelf.  This is a full-text archive of books, reports, databases, and other documents related to biomedical, health, and life sciences.

Finally, PubMed includes pre-print articles that have not yet undergone peer-review. Even if the article is not in its final, published form, it can still be a valuable source of information.

This information was transcribed from the PubMed website, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/about/

The Cochrane Library (from the publisher Wiley) is a collection of databases that contain high-quality, independent evidence to inform healthcare decision-making. This interface includes access to:

  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
  • Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)
  • Cochrane Clinical Answers

This information was transcribed from the Cochrane website, https://www.cochranelibrary.com/about/about-cochrane-library

JBI (formerly the Joanna Briggs Institute) is a global organization with one goal:  To provide the best available evidence-based information to improve healthcare practice and health outcomes.  JBI works with hospitals and universities to synthesize information and to train healthcare professionals.

This information was transcribed from the JBI website, https://jbi.global/about-jbi

Web of Science is a one-of-a-kind research database. Its coverage is staggeringly broad, encompassing the sciences, the social sciences, and arts & humanities. It includes emerging resources and conference proceedings, filling gaps that other databases often miss. And while it can be searched by traditional keywords, its real power lies in revealing the connections behind the research via citation analysis.

Using Web of Science, researchers can trace topics backward in time (Study S cited Studies A, B, and C in its bibliography) and forward in time (Studies X, Y, and Z cited Study S).  These webs of relationships place research in context: One can see how research was built on other research, which itself was built on other research.  Citation analysis is particularly useful when searching for interdisciplinary research: Where do you look for medical device development?  Medical resources?  Engineering resources?  Web of Science is largely agnostic about subject areas; its strength is making interdisciplinary connections regardless of subject matter.

Side Note:  Clarivate, Inc., the company that owns Web of Science, uses addtional advanced citation anaylsis to calculate journal impact factors and H-factors.  These metrics track the impact of journals and of individual researchers in their fields.

UpToDate is one of the top two point-of-care tools used by medical professionals today. It is a continuously updated database of clinical and drug-related decision support.  I have never met a physician who did not have an UpToDate subscription on their phone, ready to double check the latest information or to answer a patient’s question.

Lexidrug (formerly known as Lexicomp) is a very broad and deep drug database.  It is often integrated into hospitals’ electronic health record systems and can serve as their formulary.  Since Lexidrug was purchased by UpToDate, it has been integrated into UpToDate, adding to UpToDate’s decision-support capabilities for medical professionals.

Sanford Guide is the preeminent antimicrobial reference in medicine and medical research today.  It is a comprehensive resource covering infectious diseases, antimicrobial stewardship, drug information, evidence-based recommendations, decision support, and continuing education. Covers antibacterial, antifungal, antiviral, antiretroviral, antiparasitic, virtually all anti-infective agents.

  • AGRICOLA
  • APA PsycArticles
  • APA PsycInfo
  • Biomedical Research Collection: Corporate
  • CINAHL
  • Dentistry & Oral Sciences
  • DynaMed
  • ERIC
  • Health Business Elite
  • Health Policy Reference Center
  • Mental Measurements Yearbook + Tests in Print
  • Psychology & Behavioral Sciences
  • Rehabilitation & Sports Medicine

  • Clinical Key
  • Clinical Key for Nursing
  • Clinical Skills
  • Embase
  • Science Direct

  • Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials
  • Cochrane Clinical Answers
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
  • Cochrane Methodology Register
  • Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE)
  • Health Technology Assessments
  • MEDLINE
  • NHS Economic Evaluation Database

  • Health Research Premium
  • Healthcare Administration Database
  • Nursing Database
  • Public Health Database
  • Psychology Database

Tools

Here are a few other resources that don’t automatically fit into other categories. Do not be fooled — these are very useful tools for conducting research studies. We strongly recommend that you consider them as you start to plan.

We recommend that you commit to a citation manager before you begin your research. This will allow you to keep track of every resource you consult: journal articles, databases, websites, legal documents, email messages, personal interviews, and more. We recommend EndNote as an excellent citation manager. EndNote creates a database of virtually every type of information resource you can think of. You can link your articles to EndNote, and you can integrate EndNote with Word to write your manuscript. In Word, you click to insert a citation; Word pulls the citation from EndNote; it will insert it into your manuscript; it will format it according to your formatting choices; and it will automatically create your list of references. And if you want to change the format from AMA to APA, for example, you select the new format from a drop-down menu, and Word will automatically reformat all your in-text citations and your reference list with one click.

We use EndNote to manage all of the results we come up with when conducting your online research. EndNote can also deduplicate your references, saving you time on the back end when you’re collecting articles to evaluate them. We can supply your references in any format and any style you would like. But if you would like to control the formats and styles yourself, please consider purchasing your own copy of EndNote. We will provide you with the entire EndNote library of the results from your search to customize as you please.

If you would like to know more about our fees for EndNote training, please see our Menu of Services & Fees.

COVIDENCE is an online research collaboration tool.  It was designed primarily for systematic reviews, but its functionality serves researchers across all types of studies.  It is a very feature-rich system: invite collaborators, assign roles, import/export data, blinded screening, quality assessment, data extraction, automatically generate PRISMA flow diagrams, and more, all at a modest cost.

If you are collaborating as part of a research team, we strongly recommend that you at least consider COVIDENCE.  It will save you time, money, and effort over the course of your research project.