Provides workshops, resources and background information for healthcare professionals, with research tools and educational material to download. Based at Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, Oxford.
Slide presentation given to second year medical students on the principles of evidence-based medcine. From the Faculty of Medicine at McGill University (Montreal, Canada).
An article from the Medical Journal of Australia explains the basic processes and concepts, with descriptions of common computer-assisted research tools.
Strong defense of EBM, by reviewing practical examples of conflicting topics that evidence-based medicine has positively clarified to allow providing the best possible patient care. [2012]
This guide, tabbed by topic, is designed to assist health care professionals and students become effective and efficient users of the medical literature; includes a resource collection and glossary. From the University of Illinois at Chicago.
Summary and critical review of hierarchies of evidence, contrasting the different current approaches and noting their limitations and merits. Chapter from "Neurology: An Evidence-Based Approach". [2012]
Comprehensive guide to the process of conducting meta-analysis: selecting articles, inclusion criteria, effect sizes, practical analysis execution, and estimating publication bias. From the British Psychological Society.
Exceptional learning resource: a comprehensive (300+ pp. as slides) course on the systematic review process, on their strengths and limitations, with step-by-step guidance, examples and case studies on how to perform a quality systematic review. In six downloadable (as PDFs) lessons, from McGill University.
Comprehensive (74 pp., as downloadable PDF) tutorial on GRADE, the leading consensus approach to grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. From McMaster University.
Exceptionally detailed handbook of the procedures necessary to conduct a systematic review. From the authoritative Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) at the University of York, publisher of DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects).
Practical lessons on the highly variable quality of systematic reviews themselves, with an illustrative case study showing how different systematic reviews on the same question can arrive at opposite conclusions. [2001]
Guidance on some of the major limitations besetting systematic reviews (including limited datasets, unpublished data, and both statistical and clinical heterogeneity). [2007]
The cautions needed in reading and conducting a systematic review, especially strong on sensitivity analysis, meta-regression, sub-group analysis, publication bias and missing data. [2005]
An overview of several evidence grading systems, including the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, and the journal of the American Academy of Family Physicians. From the AMA Virtual Mentor project. [2011]
A systematic review of barriers to guideline implementation through an examination of rates of awareness and agreement and adoption and/or adherence, along with a call for recommendations to improve guideline adherence.
Third of a four-part comprehensive mini-course on Evidence-Based Medicine; covers the principles, methodology and appraisal of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, including use of odds ratios and relative risks.
Fourth of a four-part comprehensive mini-course on Evidence-Based Medicine; covers a sample clinical scenario through the process of the art of formulating answerable clinical questions, finding evidence, critically appraising evidence, and putting evidence into practice.
Practical guidelines for minimizing the risk of conducting a mediocre meta-analysis and for supporting researchers to accurately evaluate the published findings. [2013]
Critically examines the issue of what category of evidence should be placed at the peak of the evidence-based hierarchy/pyramid, either the randomized clinical trial (RCT), or the systematic review with meta-analysis (SR/MA), then outlines how to improve the value of meta-analytic evidence. [2014]
Interative tips from the Center for Evidence-Based Medicine on formulating clinical questions and conducting critical appraisals, accompanying the text "Evidence-based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM".
Discriminates odds from risks, and the nature of an odds ratio as an alternative to a risk ratio. From the Evidence-Based Medicine Teaching Tips Working Group.
Guidelines for when and how to search, and assess, "grey literature" (typically non-peer-reviewed conference abstracts, books, dissertations, regulatory reports, etc.) when conducting a systematic review or meta-analysis. From Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). [2013]
Teaching tips on the use of clinical prediction rules in applying evidence consistently in everyday clinical practice. From the Evidence-Based Medicine Teaching Tips Working Group.
Teaching tips on confounding variables and the statistical adjustment for differences in prognostic variables. From the Evidence-Based Medicine Teaching Tips Working Group.
Detailed exposition of all the critical procedures of conducting SRs and MAs, with invaluable tips and guides, including on the use of the Cochrane automatic SR/MA software tool RevMan.
A self-paced tutorial on the principles and processes, designed for healthcare practitioners and students. From the Duke University Medical Center, Durham, USA.
Describes and illustrates with practical examples the concept and procedure of random allocation as used in randomized controlled trials/studies (RCTs), including simple, block and stratified randomization. [2014]
Describes the potential superiority in well-defined cases of adaptive randomization which allocates more patients to the better treatments as the data accumulates in the trial. [2012]
Describes I-SPY, a groundbreaking dynamic adaptive randomization model for accelerating both identification and regulatory approval of effective investigational agents. [2013]
Drs. Gordon Guyatt and Mark Tonelli participate in this Expert Roundtable Discussion to address how they see the role of expert opinion changing in the evolving framework of what is now considered the outmoded “evidence-based hierarchy” popularized over the past 20 years. [2012]
Clinical trial comparing a blended learning (BL) versus didactic learning (DL) approach for teaching EBM, concluding that a multifaceted approach incorporating BL may be best suited for medical students. [2015]
Raises serious questions about the ethical propriety of adaptive designs where the probability of being assigned to one treatment versus its comparator is dependent on emerging data. [2015]
Compares and evaluates the optimum grading system (SIGN, GRADE, GATE and NSF-LTC) for the type of guideline being developed or question being addressed by a specialist society. [2010]
An update on and clarification of various random allocation techniques, especially simple randomization, blocking, stratified random allocation, and minimization, and a critique of non-random approaches. [2014]
Proposes an integration of the two approaches to evidence-based medicine, evidence-based guidelines (EBG) and evidence-based individual decision making (EBID). [2005]
Reviews the distinct roles, occasional tensions, and relative strengths and limitations of RCTs versus population-based observational studies, proposed as complementary forms of research. [2014]
Discusses how significant results of many RCTs hinge on very few events, and suggests that reporting the number of events required to make a statistically significant result nonsignificant (the Fragility Index) in RCTs can allow for more informed decisions about the confidence warranted by reported RCT results. [2014]
Presentation on the use of the R statistical package in Evidence-Based Medicine, especially in Clinical Research, intended mainly for, but not limited to, Bio-statisticians, especially those using SAS.
Critical review of RCT and non-RCT studies, finding that the implementation of RCT methods and the interpretation of the results can be flawed by poor trial design, observer bias, incentive bias, or simple misinterpretation. [2013]
Provides a summary of the principles, processes, and foundations of evidence-based decision making. Chapter from "Evidence-based Practice Across the Health Professions". [2013]
Details the basic steps of evidence-based practice and provides signposts to more detailed information and assistance. Compiled by the Evidence-Based Practice Group South East and the Health Service Executive of Ireland. [2014]
A review of guideline-assessing instruments, finding that alongside the comprehensive instruments such as AGREE II and DELBI, rapid-assessment instruments can be convenient tools for gaining a quick impression of the value of a guideline. [2015]
Examination of how to develop trustworthy clinical practice guidelines that besides examining what is medically best also allow consistency with patients’ priorities, concerns, and preferences, thus delivering customized care at the level of individuals and their families. [2015]
Examines the effect of EBM in changing physicians’ attitude towards clinical guidelines, and describes the facilitators and barriers to implementing those clinical guidelines in clinical practice. [2015]
Explores the historic use of different endpoints, and the associated degree of regulatory flexibility shown, by the FDA to support regular and accelerated approval of cancer drugs. [2013]
Discusses the nature, types, and pros and cons of adaptive designs in oncology trials that use accumulating data to modify the ongoing trial without undermining the integrity and validity of the trial. [2014]
A review of adaptive clinical trial design and adpative randomization, examining their impact, challenges, obstacles, and strategies for effective deployment. [2008]
Given rapid development of new genomic biomarkers, this paper explores whether and how we can make randomized trials more adaptable to a changing landscape, and whether we still need such trials at all. [2013]
Demonstrates an assessment of sugar-sweetened beverages and type 2 diabetes as an example to show how the new technique called ‘evidence mapping’ can be used to organize studies and evaluate design heterogeneity prior to meta-analysis. [2014]
Critical examination of key issues of study identification and selection; publication, search and selection bias; results heterogeneity, and data analysis. [2008]
Reflections growing out of a conversation by John Ioannidis with David Sackett in 2004 about evidence-based medicine (EBM), the movement Sackett had spearheaded, updated to developments through 2016. [2016]
An overview of the design, analysis, and interpretation of Mendelian randomization studies, with a special emphasis on assumptions and limitations, and an examination of different analytic strategies for strengthening causal inference. [2016]
An overview of the methodological approaches used in Mendelian randomization studies, with a discussion of MR assumptions and reporting of statistical methods. and a checklist for the reporting of MR studies. [2015]
Critical examination of the pros and caveats about meta-analysis, and how the limitations can be overcome; also includes a illustrative case vignette. From CEB, the Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics. [2012]