Evidence Based Practice

Similar documents
Module 5. The Epidemiological Basis of Randomised Controlled Trials. Landon Myer School of Public Health & Family Medicine, University of Cape Town

In this second module in the clinical trials series, we will focus on design considerations for Phase III clinical trials. Phase III clinical trials

Instrument for the assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analysis

Learning objectives. Examining the reliability of published research findings

GRADE. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. British Association of Dermatologists April 2018

Critical Appraisal Series

GRADE. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. British Association of Dermatologists April 2014

Chapter 11: Experiments and Observational Studies p 318

Chapter 13. Experiments and Observational Studies. Copyright 2012, 2008, 2005 Pearson Education, Inc.

Recent developments for combining evidence within evidence streams: bias-adjusted meta-analysis

Chapter 13 Summary Experiments and Observational Studies

GLOSSARY OF GENERAL TERMS

Evidence- and Value-based Solutions for Health Care Clinical Improvement Consults, Content Development, Training & Seminars, Tools

Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for use in JBI Systematic Reviews

Structural Approach to Bias in Meta-analyses

COMMITTEE FOR PROPRIETARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS (CPMP) POINTS TO CONSIDER ON MISSING DATA

Are the likely benefits worth the potential harms and costs? From McMaster EBCP Workshop/Duke University Medical Center

Delfini Evidence Tool Kit

The Effective Public Health Practice Project Tool

User s guide to the checklist of items assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials of nonpharmacological treatment

Goal: To become familiar with the methods that researchers use to investigate aspects of causation and methods of treatment

Critical Review Form Clinical Prediction or Decision Rule

The comparison or control group may be allocated a placebo intervention, an alternative real intervention or no intervention at all.

Study design continued: intervention studies. Outline. Repetition principal approaches. Gustaf Edgren, PhD Karolinska Institutet.

Critical Appraisal Istanbul 2011

CHAMP STUDY SIMULATIONS: PICK THE WINNER. Elizabeth Zahn 19 May 2014

Purpose. Study Designs. Objectives. Observational Studies. Analytic Studies

Overview of Study Designs in Clinical Research

Design of Experiments & Introduction to Research

Chapter 9. Producing Data: Experiments. BPS - 5th Ed. Chapter 9 1

Evidence Informed Practice Online Learning Module Glossary

The ROBINS-I tool is reproduced from riskofbias.info with the permission of the authors. The tool should not be modified for use.

Appraising the Literature Overview of Study Designs

Introduzione al metodo GRADE

04/12/2014. Research Methods in Psychology. Chapter 6: Independent Groups Designs. What is your ideas? Testing

Review. Chapter 5. Common Language. Ch 3: samples. Ch 4: real world sample surveys. Experiments, Good and Bad

GATE CAT Intervention RCT/Cohort Studies

Strategies for handling missing data in randomised trials

AP Statistics Exam Review: Strand 2: Sampling and Experimentation Date:

Controlled Trials. Spyros Kitsiou, PhD

SkillBuilder Shortcut: Levels of Evidence

STUDY DESIGN. Jerrilyn A. Cambron, DC, PhD Department of Research. RE6002: Week 2. National University of Health Sciences

Checklist for appraisal of study relevance (child sex offenses)

Goal: To become familiar with the methods that researchers use to investigate aspects of causation and methods of treatment

Glossary From Running Randomized Evaluations: A Practical Guide, by Rachel Glennerster and Kudzai Takavarasha

Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives. Distinguish between primary and secondary studies. Discuss ways to assess methodological quality. Review limitations of all studies.

Role of evidence from observational studies in the process of health care decision making

Leaning objectives. Outline. 13-Jun-16 BASIC EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS

Chapter 1 Data Collection

Nature and significance of the local problem

CRITICAL APPRAISAL SKILLS PROGRAMME Making sense of evidence about clinical effectiveness. 11 questions to help you make sense of case control study

CHECK-LISTS AND Tools DR F. R E Z A E I DR E. G H A D E R I K U R D I S TA N U N I V E R S I T Y O F M E D I C A L S C I E N C E S

ARCHE Risk of Bias (ROB) Guidelines

Protocol Development: The Guiding Light of Any Clinical Study

ACR OA Guideline Development Process Knee and Hip

RAG Rating Indicator Values

The RoB 2.0 tool (individually randomized, cross-over trials)

CRITICAL APPRAISAL WORKSHEET

Guidance Document for Claims Based on Non-Inferiority Trials

AOTA S EVIDENCE EXCHANGE CRITICALLY APPRAISED PAPER (CAP) GUIDELINES Annual AOTA Conference Poster Submissions Critically Appraised Papers (CAPs) are

The Practice of Statistics 1 Week 2: Relationships and Data Collection

aps/stone U0 d14 review d2 teacher notes 9/14/17 obj: review Opener: I have- who has

Musculoskeletal Annotated Bibliography

Statistical Analysis Plan

Human intuition is remarkably accurate and free from error.

Probabilities and Research. Statistics

Observational Study Designs. Review. Today. Measures of disease occurrence. Cohort Studies

Experimental Validity

CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINE (CPG)

Mapping the Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts (KC) to core concepts for the main steps of Evidence-Based Health Care (EBHC).

Beyond the intention-to treat effect: Per-protocol effects in randomized trials

Systematic reviews: From evidence to recommendation. Marcel Dijkers, PhD, FACRM Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

1. Draft checklist for judging on quality of animal studies (Van der Worp et al., 2010)

5-ASA for the treatment of Crohn s disease DR. STEPHEN HANAUER FEINBERG SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY, CHICAGO, IL, USA

Clinical Evidence: Asking the Question and Understanding the Answer. Keeping Up to Date. Keeping Up to Date

Chapter Three Research Methodology

MAT 155. Chapter 1 Introduction to Statistics. Key Concept. Basics of Collecting Data. August 20, S1.5_3 Collecting Sample Data

Version No. 7 Date: July Please send comments or suggestions on this glossary to

CHAPTER 4 Designing Studies

USDA Nutrition Evidence Library: Systematic Review Methodology

The role of Randomized Controlled Trials

Experimental and Quasi-Experimental designs

CLINICAL DECISION USING AN ARTICLE ABOUT TREATMENT JOSEFINA S. ISIDRO LAPENA MD, MFM, FPAFP PROFESSOR, UPCM

Sampling. (James Madison University) January 9, / 13

PEER REVIEW HISTORY ARTICLE DETAILS TITLE (PROVISIONAL)

fact sheet 1 Using evidence to guide decision making What is evidence based practice? Why is evidence important?

Essential Skills for Evidence-based Practice: Statistics for Therapy Questions

Randomized Experiments with Noncompliance. David Madigan

Evaluating experiments (part 2) Andy J. Wills

Chapter 9. Producing Data: Experiments. BPS - 5th Ed. Chapter 9 1

Evidence based practice. Dr. Rehab Gwada

Statistical Considerations for Research Design. Analytic Goal. Analytic Process

Research Methods in Psychology UNIT 3 PSYCHOLOGY 2013

Study design. Chapter 64. Research Methodology S.B. MARTINS, A. ZIN, W. ZIN

In this chapter we discuss validity issues for quantitative research and for qualitative research.

Evidence Based Medicine Prof P Rheeder Clinical Epidemiology. Module 2: Applying EBM to Diagnosis

11 questions to help you make sense of a case control study

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies (MOOSE): Checklist.

lab exam lab exam Experimental Design Experimental Design when: Nov 27 - Dec 1 format: length = 1 hour each lab section divided in two

Transcription:

Evidence Based Practice RCS 6740 7/26/04 Evidence Based Practice: Definitions Evidence based practice is the integration of the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research with individual clinical experiences (Singh & Oswald, 2004) It is the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current evidence in making decisions about client treatment and care Benefits of Evidence Based Practice Enhances the effectiveness and the efficiency of diagnosis and treatment Provides clinicians with a specific methodology to search for research Helps clinicians critically evaluating published and unpublished research Facilitates patient-centered outcomes

Steps of Evidence Based Practice 1) Define the problem 2) Search the treatment literature for evidence about the problem and solutions to the problem 3) Critically evaluate the literature (evidence) 4) Choose and initiate treatment 5) Monitor Patient Outcomes Random/Controlled Trials 1. Were detailed descriptions provided of the study population? 2. Did the study include a large enough patient sample to achieve sufficient statistical power? 3. Were the patients (subjects) randomly allocated to treatment and control groups? 4. Was the randomization successful, as shown by comparability of sociodemographic and other variables of the patients in each group? 5. If the two groups were not successfully randomized, were appropriate statistical tests (e.g., logistic regression analysis) used to adjust for confounding variables that may have affected treatment outcome(s)? 6. Did the study use a single- or double-blind methodology? 7. Did the study use placebo controls? 8. Were the two treatment conditions stated in a manner that (a) clearly identified differences between the two, (b) would permit independent replication, and (c) would allow judgment of their generalizability to everyday practice?

9. Were the two arms of the treatment protocol (treatment vs. control) managed in exactly the same manner except for the interventions? 10. Were the outcomes measured broadly with appropriate, reliable and valid instruments? 11. Were the outcomes clearly stated? 12. Were the primary and secondary end-points of the study clearly defined? 13. Were the side effects and potential harms of the treatment and control conditions appropriately measured and documented? 14. In addition to disorder- or condition-specific outcomes, were patient specific outcomes, functional status, and quality of life issues measured? 15. Were the measurements free from bias and error? 16. Were the patients followed up after the termination of the study and, if so, for how long? 17. Was there documentation of the proportion of patients who dropped out of the study? 18. Was there documentation of the proportion of patients who were lost to follow up? 19. Was there documentation of when and why the attrition occurred? 20. If the attrition was substantial, was there documentation of a comparison of baseline characteristics and risk factors of treatment nonresponders or withdrawals with those who were treatment responders or completed the study? 21. Was there reporting of the results in terms of number-needed-to-treat (i.e., the reciprocal of the absolute risk reduction rate).

22. Were multiple comparisons used to increase the likelihood of a chance finding of a nominally statistically significant difference? 23. Were correct statistical tests used to analyze the data? 24. Were the results interpreted appropriately? 25. Did the interpretation of the results go beyond the actual data? Other Types of Research 1. Is the treatment or technique available/affordable? 2. How large is the likely effect? 3. How uncertain are the study results? 4. What are the likely adverse effects of treatment? Are they reversible? 5. Are the patients included in the studies similar to the patient(s) I am dealing with? If not, are the differences great enough to render the evidence useless? Other Types of Research Cont. 6. Was the study setting similar to my own setting? 7. Will my patient receive the same cointerventions that were used in the study? If not, will it matter? 8. How good was adherence (compliance) in the study? Is adherence likely to be similar in my own practice? 9. Are the outcomes examined in the studies important to me/my patients?

Other Types of Research Cont. 10. What are my patients preferences regarding the treatment? What are the likely harms and the likely benefits? 11. If I apply the evidence inappropriately to my patient, how harmful is it likely to be? Will it be too late to change my mind if I have inappropriately applied the evidence? Questions and Comments??