Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
16,992
result(s) for
"Evidence-Based Medicine - methods"
Sort by:
Medical Hypnosis Primer
This brief Primer, assembled by top recognized hypnosis authorities, briefly presents the basic concepts of modern medical hypnosis and encourages mental health care practitioners to learn how to use hypnosis as an adjunct to standard medical care. It also lays the groundwork for the teaching and practice of hypnosis as part of the required syllabus for every medical and nursing school as well as graduate programs in clinical and counseling psychology. Medical Hypnosis Primer goes far in advancing the medical and factual aspects of this still greatly misunderstood field, and is of great value to practitioners, teachers, and students.
eBook
Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making in Healthcare
In the evaluation of healthcare, rigorous methods of quantitative assessment are necessary to establish interventions that are both effective and cost- effective. Usually a single study will not fully address these issues and it is desirable to synthesize evidence from multiple sources. This book aims to provide a practical guide to evidence synthesis for the purpose of decision making, starting with a simple single parameter model, where all studies estimate the same quantity (pairwise meta-analysis) and progressing to more complex multi-parameter structures (including meta-regression, mixed treatment comparisons, Markov models of disease progression, and epidemiology models). A comprehensive, coherent framework is adopted and estimated using Bayesian methods. Key features: * A coherent approach to evidence synthesis from multiple sources. * Focus is given to Bayesian methods for evidence synthesis that can be integrated within cost-effectiveness analyses in a probabilistic framework using Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation. * Provides methods to statistically combine evidence from a range of evidence structures. * Emphasizes the importance of model critique and checking for evidence consistency. * Presents numerous worked examples, exercises and solutions drawn from a variety of medical disciplines throughout the book. * WinBUGS code is provided for all examples. Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making in Healthcare is intended for health economists, decision modelers, statisticians and others involved in evidence synthesis, health technology assessment, and economic evaluation of health technologies.
eBook
Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach
Scoping reviews are a relatively new approach to evidence synthesis and currently there exists little guidance regarding the decision to choose between a systematic review or scoping review approach when synthesising evidence. The purpose of this article is to clearly describe the differences in indications between scoping reviews and systematic reviews and to provide guidance for when a scoping review is (and is not) appropriate.
Researchers may conduct scoping reviews instead of systematic reviews where the purpose of the review is to identify knowledge gaps, scope a body of literature, clarify concepts or to investigate research conduct. While useful in their own right, scoping reviews may also be helpful precursors to systematic reviews and can be used to confirm the relevance of inclusion criteria and potential questions.
Scoping reviews are a useful tool in the ever increasing arsenal of evidence synthesis approaches. Although conducted for different purposes compared to systematic reviews, scoping reviews still require rigorous and transparent methods in their conduct to ensure that the results are trustworthy. Our hope is that with clear guidance available regarding whether to conduct a scoping review or a systematic review, there will be less scoping reviews being performed for inappropriate indications better served by a systematic review, and vice-versa.
Journal Article
What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences
Systematic reviews have been considered as the pillar on which evidence-based healthcare rests. Systematic review methodology has evolved and been modified over the years to accommodate the range of questions that may arise in the health and medical sciences. This paper explores a concept still rarely considered by novice authors and in the literature: determining the type of systematic review to undertake based on a research question or priority.
Within the framework of the evidence-based healthcare paradigm, defining the question and type of systematic review to conduct is a pivotal first step that will guide the rest of the process and has the potential to impact on other aspects of the evidence-based healthcare cycle (evidence generation, transfer and implementation). It is something that novice reviewers (and others not familiar with the range of review types available) need to take account of but frequently overlook. Our aim is to provide a typology of review types and describe key elements that need to be addressed during question development for each type.
In this paper a typology is proposed of various systematic review methodologies. The review types are defined and situated with regard to establishing corresponding questions and inclusion criteria. The ultimate objective is to provide clarified guidance for both novice and experienced reviewers and a unified typology with respect to review types.
Journal Article