Evidence-Based Medicine

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE 3. Studies Assessing Consistency of Evidence Across Consistent Inconsistent Most studies found similar or at least coherent conclusions (coherence means that differences are explainable). or If high-quality and up-to-date systematic reviews or meta-analyses exist, they support the recommendation Considerable variation among study findings and lack of coherence or If high-quality and up-to-date systematic reviews or meta-analyses exist, they do not find consistent evidence in favor of the recommendation.. -18-
Strength of Recommendation Based on a Body of Evidence Is this a key recommendation for clinicians regarding diagnosis or treatment that merits a label Yes Is the recommendation based on patientoriented evidence (i.e., an improvement in morbidity, mortality, symptoms, quality of life, or cost) Yes Is the recommendation based on expert opinion, bench research, a consensus guideline, usual practice, clinical experience, or a case series study No Is the recommendation based on one of the following • Cochrane Review with a clear recommendation • USPSTF Grade A recommendation • Clinical Evidence rating of Beneficial • Consistent findings from at least two goodquality randomized controlled trials or a systematic review/meta-analysis of same • Validated clinical decision rule in a relevant population • Consistent findings from at least two good-quality diagnostic cohort studies or systematic review/meta-analysis of same No Yes Yes Yes No Recommendation not needed Strength of Recommendation = C Strength of Recommendation = A Strength of Recommendation = B Figure 1. Assigning a Strength-of-Recommendation grade based on a body of evidence. (USPSTF = U.S. Preventive Services Task Force) -19-
Page 1 and 2: Highlights On Evidence-Based Medici
Page 3 and 4: -3-
Page 5 and 6: Index Contents Page No. - Preface t
Page 7 and 8: Preface to the Sixth Edition Praise
Page 9 and 10: EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE Introductio
Page 11 and 12: The practice of evidence-based medi
Page 13 and 14: A systematic review is a critical a
Page 15 and 16: Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy
Page 17: TABLE 2. Assessing Quality of Evide
Page 21 and 22: In order to obtain the best evidenc
Page 23 and 24: The following are all common source
Page 25 and 26: (Suggestive Guideline) STRATEGIC PL
Page 27 and 28: GLOSSARY OF TERMS IN EVIDENCE-BASED
Page 29 and 30: 9. Where the condition is acute and
Page 31 and 32: Cohort studies should not be includ
Page 33 and 34: Crossver-sectional Study The observ
Page 35 and 36: Experimental study A study in which
Page 37 and 38: I Incidence The number of new cases
Page 39 and 40: until the clinician and patient are
Page 41 and 42: O Observational studies Observation
Page 43 and 44: patients. POEMs are selected from r
Page 45 and 46: Prevalence The proportion of people
Page 47 and 48: Relative risk (RR) The number of ti
Page 49 and 50: Standardised mean difference (SMD)
Page 51 and 52: W Weighted mean difference (WMD) A
Page 53 and 54: Evidence-Based Medicine Resources A
Page 55 and 56: (with ACP Journal Club). The Cochra
Page 57 and 58: C- Resources that will help you to
Page 59 and 60: References For further readings 1.
Page 61 and 62: 28. Mulrow C, Cook D. Integrating h
Page 63 and 64: 58. Khoja TA. Glossary of Health Ca
Page 65 and 66: 85. Lorenz KA, Ryan GW, Morton CS.
Page 67 and 68: -67-

Evidence-Based Medicine

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?