The use of BEME reviews in the medical education literature

Introduction: Knowledge syntheses in medical education are intended to promote the translation to, and mobilization of, research knowledge into practice. Despite the effort invested in conducting them, how these knowledge syntheses are used is unclear. This study aimed to explore how knowledge syntheses published by the Best Evidence Medical Education Collaboration (BEME) have been used, in a cross-section of published literature. Methods: Citation patterns for BEME reviews were explored using data drawn from Web of Science and Scopus, and a sub-sample of citing papers. Results: Bibliometric data on 3419 papers citing 29 BEME reviews were analysed. More detailed data were extracted from a random sample of 629 full-text papers. Discussion: BEME reviews were most often positioned to consolidate and summarize the current state of knowledge on a particular topic and to identify gaps in the literature; they were also used to justify current research, and less frequently used to contextualize and explain results, or direct future areas of research. Their use to identify instruments or methodological approaches was relatively absent. Conclusion: While BEME reviews are primarily used to justify and support other studies, the current literature does not demonstrate their translation to educational practice.