Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund

Berlin Brandenburg

and
and

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
Language
Year
  • 1
    Language: English
    In: CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 06 September 2011, Vol.183(12), pp.E933-8
    Description: This article describes the evidence review and guideline development method developed for the Clinical Preventive Guidelines for Immigrants and Refugees in Canada by the Canadian Collaboration for Immigrant and Refugee Health Guideline Committee. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) best-practice framework was combined with the recently developed Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to produce evidence-based clinical guidelines for immigrants and refugees in Canada. A systematic approach was designed to produce the evidence reviews and apply the GRADE approach, including building on evidence from previous systematic reviews, searching for and comparing evidence between general and specific immigrant populations, and applying the GRADE criteria for making recommendations. This method was used for priority health conditions that had been selected by practitioners caring for immigrants and refugees in Canada. This article outlines the 14-step method that was defined to standardize the guideline development process for each priority health condition.
    Keywords: Emigrants and Immigrants ; Evidence-Based Medicine ; Practice Guidelines As Topic ; Refugees
    ISSN: 08203946
    E-ISSN: 1488-2329
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Language: English
    In: Research on Social Work Practice, September 2018, Vol.28(6), pp.651-652
    Keywords: Social Welfare & Social Work ; Psychology
    ISSN: 1049-7315
    E-ISSN: 1552-7581
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Language: English
    In: Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, Feb, 2013, Vol.67(2), p.190(4)
    Keywords: Health Care Disparities -- Research ; Health Care Disparities -- Analysis ; Health Care Disparities -- Demographic Aspects
    ISSN: 0143-005X
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    Language: English
    In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, May 2013, Vol.66(5), pp.522-523
    Description: [...]we think it is important that researchers also keep the broader research agenda in mind and how it may affect the research gaps and needs. [...]research questions (research needs) are not static and can change and evolve over time. [...]we currently do not have adequate evidence evaluating how research...
    Keywords: Medicine
    ISSN: 0895-4356
    E-ISSN: 1878-5921
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    Language: English
    In: Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, Dec, 2011, Vol.65(12), p.95(4)
    Keywords: Health Care Disparities -- Social Aspects ; Health Care Disparities -- Reports ; Social Groups -- Analysis
    ISSN: 0143-005X
    E-ISSN: 14702738
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    Language: English
    In: Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 6 January 2012, Vol.66(1), p.95
    Description: The final report from the WHO Commission on the social determinants of health recently noted: ‘For policy, however important an ethical imperative, values alone are insufficient. There needs to be evidence on what can be done and what is likely to work in practice to improve health and reduce health inequities.’ This is challenging, because understanding how to reduce health inequities between the poorest and better-off members of society may require a greater use of subgroup analysis to explore the differential effects of public health interventions. However, while this may produce evidence that is more policy relevant, the requisite subgroup analyses are often seen as tantamount to statistical malpractice. This paper considers some of the methodological problems with subgroup analysis, and its applicability to considerations of equity, using both clinical and public health examples. Finally, it suggests how policy needs for information on subgroups can be met while maintaining rigour.
    Keywords: Health Policy ; Inequalities Si ; Public Health Epidemiology ; Socioeconomic ; Systematic Reviews
    ISSN: 0143-005X
    ISSN: 0143005X
    E-ISSN: 1470-2738
    E-ISSN: 14702738
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    Language: English
    In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, May 2013, Vol.66(5), pp.511-521
    Description: This study aimed to develop and pilot an equity lens that could help researchers in developing a more equity-oriented approach toward priority setting and agenda setting in systematic reviews. We developed an equity lens to guide the development and evaluation of a prioritization process and evaluate its outcomes based on the information derived from a discussion workshop and a comparison with the existing literature on the topic. We piloted the process section of the equity lens across the 13 structured priority-setting approaches in the Cochrane Collaboration. We devised an equity lens with two checklists: one to guide the process of priority setting (nine questions) and the other to evaluate the outcomes of priority setting (eight questions). Of the nine questions, seven questions were partially addressed by at least one of the prioritization projects. Two questions were not considered in any of them. The prioritization projects did not report sufficient outcome data, thus we could not explore the eight question on evaluating outcomes. Currently, there are few strategies in the Cochrane Collaboration that explicitly address the research priorities of individuals from different sociodemographic groups. The equity lens for priority setting and agenda setting can help project teams to develop a more equity-oriented approach to set a research agenda and/or prioritize research topics. However, further studies are needed to evaluate its impact on the prioritization process.
    Keywords: Systematic Reviews ; Priority Setting ; The Cochrane Collaboration ; Equity ; Social Determinants of Health ; Research Priorities ; Medicine
    ISSN: 0895-4356
    E-ISSN: 1878-5921
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 8
    Language: English
    In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, November 2013, Vol.66(11), pp.1251-1261
    Description: Assessment of applicability is an essential part of the systematic review process. In the context of systematic reviews of the effects of interventions, applicability is an assessment of whether the findings of a review can be applied in a particular context or population. For more complex interventions, assessing applicability can be challenging because of greater diversity of, and interactions within and between, the intended population, intervention components, comparison conditions, and outcomes as well as a range of further considerations related to intervention context and theoretical basis. We recommend that review authors plan and conduct analyses to explain variations in effect and answer questions about mechanisms of action and influence of different settings, contexts, and populations. We also recommend that review authors provide rich descriptions of the setting, implementation details, resource use, and contexts of included studies and assess applicability for at least one target population, setting, and context. This should facilitate applicability assessments by end users. Consensus on terminology is needed and guidance should be developed for the synthesis of implementation information within reviews as well as the documentation of applicability judgments by review authors.
    Keywords: Applicability ; Systematic Review ; Complex Intervention ; Generalizability ; External Validity ; Transferability ; Intervention Implementation ; Medicine
    ISSN: 0895-4356
    E-ISSN: 1878-5921
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 9
    Language: English
    In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, December 2015, Vol.68(12), pp.1526-1528
    Description: The classification system was used to explore methodologic differences across search methods, data extraction (dual vs. single), risk of bias assessment, and extent of qualitative and quantitative analysis. [...]it provides a useful starting point for developing a research agenda to explore key questions about the validity of these methods as well as their utility for decision making. [...]Hartling et al. emphasize that each rapid review product is based on a relationship with a particular decision maker (described as "intimate") and their decision-making needs.
    Keywords: Medicine
    ISSN: 0895-4356
    E-ISSN: 1878-5921
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 10
    Language: English
    In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, May 2013, Vol.66(5), pp.474-482
    Description: The purpose of this study was to assess the presence and effectiveness of existing systems of prioritization for Cochrane review topics and to explore methods of improving those systems. We surveyed groups of Cochrane review authors and recorded any evidence of their use of priority-setting processes or policies. To evaluate the effectiveness of the policies we encountered, we assessed them using two frameworks from the literature: “Accountability for Reasonableness” (1) and Sibbald’s 2009 framework (2) for successful priority setting. We then held two workshops with the subject groups to discuss our findings and their implications. Of the 66 groups surveyed, 29 had a system in place to inform the selection or prioritization of topics for Cochrane reviews. Fifteen groups used a more comprehensive structured approach that eventually resulted in a list of ranked priority titles for authoring, updating, or disseminating Cochrane reviews. Most groups involved researchers, practitioners, and patients in their prioritization processes. Groups within The Cochrane Collaboration currently use a range of different priority-setting systems, some of which are more detailed than others. These differences often reflect the nature of The Cochrane Collaboration itself: given the topic breadth, history, and variety of international contexts present in the organization, a single unified system would not always be appropriate. All Cochrane entities, however, should have or develop strategic plans to improve the inclusiveness and transparency of their own prioritization processes, increase the number of finished prioritized reviews, and make more effective use of feedback from end users to increase the likelihood of producing reviews that have positive effects on health outcomes.
    Keywords: Systematic Reviews ; Priority-Setting ; The Cochrane Collaboration ; Research Priority ; Research and Development ; Evidence-Based Medicine ; Medicine
    ISSN: 0895-4356
    E-ISSN: 1878-5921
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. Further information can be found on the KOBV privacy pages