MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2319604781 · doi:10.1097/00132981-200201000-00014

Evidence-Based Medicine Finds a Home on the Internet

2002· article· en· W2319604781 sur OpenAlex
Glenn Fink, Ash Nashed

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueEmergency Medicine News · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueHealth Sciences Research and Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEvidence-based medicineHealth careEvidence-based practiceCritical appraisalAgency (philosophy)Scientific evidenceQuality (philosophy)MedicineMedical educationNursingPsychologyFamily medicineAlternative medicinePolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Evidence-based medicine aids busy clinicians in dealing with the information overload created by thousands of medical publications with extremely variable content. The discipline relies on randomized clinical trials as the basic building block of medical knowledge. The evolution and maturation of evidence-based medicine can be seen in the increasing amount of easily understood information available to clinicians. McMasters University is one of the established homes of evidence-based medicine, and its web site, http://hiru.mcmaster.ca, is perhaps the best place to begin an investigation of evidence-based medicine. According to the McMaster's group, “evidence-based health care promotes the collection, interpretation, and integration of valid, important, and applicable patient-reported, clinician-observed, and research-derived evidence. The best available evidence, moderated by patient circumstances and preferences, is applied to improve the quality of clinical judgments and facilitate cost-effective health care.” The maturity of evidence-based health care can be appreciated by reviewing the broad and deep substance of their projects. The Cancer Care Ontario-Program in Evidence-Based Care brings this topic to oncologic care. The Guidelines Appraisal Project represents an effort to bring health care professionals together to promote the development and use of practice guidelines. The Health Evidence Application and Linkage Network (HEALNet) collaborates with health care decision-makers and other private and public sector partners to facilitate the transfer of its research to users. The McMaster Evidence-Based Practice Center is under contract with the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to make recommendations to governments, professional organizations, and consumers based on cost-effective analysis of health care topics. The GUIDE Project (Gaining a better Understanding of the role the Internet on Decisions based on Evidence) facilitates the identification and anticipation of opportunities and problems created by the rapid growth of the Internet. Systematic Reviews The Canadian Cochrane Network & Centre supports the Cochrane collaboration, an international organization that brings systematic reviews to clinical practice. The Cochrane Collaboration (www.update-software.com/Cochrane/default.HTM) embodies the bulk of practical evidence-based medicine available on the Internet. The Database of Systematic Reviews contains full-text articles reviewing the efficacy of health care. The articles are either systematic reviews or meta-analyses. The abstract section is open to all Internet users, and posts concise abstracts of systematic reviews by reviewers at the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at the University of York, England. This large collection of clinical abstracts is extremely useful to the active clinician. It is easy to find yourself looking at one abstract after another. The abstracts themselves could be used as handouts to give to a select group of your patients as part of your determining what the patient's preferences are. For example, it may be useful for the patient to see that the side effects of antibiotics almost negate the modest beneficial effect that antibiotics have on bronchitis. Besides allowing the clinician to practice evidence-based medicine, informed patient preference increases the likelihood of achieving high patient satisfaction. The Bandolier site (www.jr2.ox.ac.uk/bandolier) is a British site that originated in 1994 as a print publication to bring evidence-based medicine to general practitioners in Britain. Bandolier scans PubMed and the Cochrane databases for new systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and publishes interesting and sensible reviews. One of the criticisms of evidence-based medicine is that its conclusions can be misapplied if used only in the service of cost-cutting. This site was created as a reaction to societal forces in England, including the National Health Service, that apply medical tenets broadly across patient populations without regard to the uniqueness of individual patients and circumstances. Many will find their skepticism born of experience to be refreshing and the fact that their opinions are based on the science of evidence-based medicine reassuring. BestBETs' BETs (Best Evidence Topics) are produced from the emergency medicine department of Manchester Royal Infirmary, UK. The three hundred articles reviewed on the site (www.bestbets.org) are pertinent to the practice of emergency medicine. The TRIP (Turning Research into Practice) (www.tripdatabase.com) database contains information from 61 sites of high-quality information. A search for bronchitis returns 32 citations. The search returns are sorted into several categories, including evidence-based, query-answering services, peer-reviewed journal, guidelines, eTextbooks, and experimental links to clinical queries on PubMed. Bringing Research to Clinicians The Journal of Family Practice (www.jfampract.com/display_archives.asp?YEAR=POEMs) posts critical evaluations of randomized trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. They have posted 95 reviews known as POEMs (Patient-Oriented Evidence that Matters.) The University of Sheffield's School of Health and related Research's Netting the Evidence (www.shef.ac.uk/˜scharr/ir/netting/net.html) has the most comprehensive set of Internet links related to evidence-based medicine. One of the main goals of evidence-based medicine is to bring good research to clinicians. The Internet provides the perfect medium for the busy clinician to access this information. You will be handsomely rewarded for familiarizing yourself with these sites.Table: Evidence-Based Medicine Sites on the Internet

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,724
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,010
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,2890,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,521
Tête enseignante GPT0,528
Écart entre enseignants0,007 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle