Experts In Evidence-based Medicine Research Articles

Focusing on patient-oriented evidence that matters: a practical approach to keeping up with new research.

One of the challenges of medical practice, especially primary care because of its breadth, is keeping up with the latest research findings. As physicians, how can we select, among hundreds of thousands of research studies published each year, those worth knowing about? Since 1996, a group of American primary care physicians have been systematically reviewing over 100 journals every month to identify new Patient-Oriented Evidence that Matters (POEMs). To be a POEM, a research study must have the potential to change clinical practice by addressing hard, patient-oriented outcomes, such as mortality, intensity or duration of symptoms, or quality of life, as opposed to disease-oriented (surrogate) outcomes, such as laboratory parameters. In addition, it must be methodologically valid, i.e., reasonably free of bias, with its validity evaluated through objective criteria by experts in evidence-based medicine with no conflicts of interest with the industry. To be useful at the point of care, these studies must be easy to retrieve and require little work to review. Starting from this issue, a selection of POEMs most likely to change and improve Italian primary care practice will be published monthly in Recenti Progressi in Medicina as brief evidence summaries. In addition, yearly, we will present an article summarizing the 20 most important research studies for primary care of the previous year.

Guidelines for high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy in neonates (2022).

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy, which is important in noninvasive respiratory support, is increasingly being used in critically ill neonates with respiratory failure because it is comfortable, easy to setup, and has a low incidence of nasal trauma. The advantages, indications, and risks of HFNC have been the focus of research in recent years, resulting in the development of the application. Based on current evidence, we developed guidelines for HFNC in neonates using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). The guidelines were formulated after extensive consultations with neonatologists, respiratory therapists, nurse specialists, and evidence-based medicine experts. We have proposed 24 recommendations for 9 key questions. The guidelines aim to be a source of evidence and reference of HFNC oxygen therapy in clinical practice, and so that more neonates and their families will benefit from HFNC.

A Six-Month Assessment of Medical News Reporting in Leading Local Newspapers in the Philippines: Is It Based on Good Evidence?

Background. Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) has brought about a paradigm shift in medical practice. However, evidence in peerreviewed medical journals is inaccessible to a lay person for whom the newspaper is the most accessible source of information. This study aims to determine if medical news articles (MNAs) in leading local newspapers in the Philippines are based on good evidence.Objectives. To characterize MNAs based on: (1) references cited and their level of evidence as appraised by authors and two independent EBM experts; (2) use of clinical outcomes; (3) mentionof treatment benefit and potential harm in measurable terms; (4) mention of cost of treatment; and (5) disclosure of pharmaceutical industry support.Methods. MNAs on non-surgical prevention and treatment of adult diseases from January to June 2002 in three leading local Philippine newspapers were appraised. MNAs on diagnosis, pediatric and surgical treatments, multiple treatment modalities, “Dear Doctor” or “Q&A” columns were excluded. References were assessed independently by two EBM experts; differences were resolved by consensus.Results. The five conditions most frequently reported on were: diabetes, coronary heart disease, cancer, arthritis and hypertension. Of 113 MNAs, 94 (83%) cited references—54 were medical journal articles, 34 (63%) of which were based on good quality evidence. Out of the 94 MNAs, 51 (54%) reported clinical endpoints, 31 (33%) quantified benefit, 21 (22%) cited potential harm, 22 (23%) disclosed industry support, and 4 (4%) mentioned cost of treatment. None of the MNA authors mentioned critically appraising their references.Conclusion. The 113 MNAs published in three leading local newspapers in the Philippines during the six-month period showed shortcomings in providing information to benefit the public. EBM awareness among journalists and studies covering a longer period and a broader line of the print media arerecommended.

Developing Consensus-Based Guidelines for Case Reporting in Aesthetic Medicine: Enhancing Transparency and Standardization.

Clinical case reporting plays a vital role in sharing detailed patient narratives, providing insights into rare conditions, innovative treatments, and unexpected outcomes. However, existing reporting guidelines in aesthetic medicine fail to capture the specific nuances of procedures and outcomes in this field. The authors' objectives were to develop comprehensive guidelines for Case REporting in Aesthetic Medicine (CREAM). The study employed a 3-phase consensus process, including a literature review, expert interviews, and a consensus meeting. A diverse group of 10 expert participants (plastic surgeons, dermatologists, noncore specialists, evidence-based medicine expert, and research scientist) in Phase I and 30 experienced aesthetic practitioners in Phase II contributed to the research. Statistical analysis was conducted to assess agreement levels among participants and explore associations and variations within the data. The participants represented various specialties, genders, LGBTQ+ identities, and ethnic backgrounds. The research resulted in the development of the CREAM guidelines, consisting of a 16-item checklist. The guidelines covered essential aspects of case reporting, such as patient and practice information, procedure details, clinical assessment and outcomes, adverse events, and ethical considerations. Statistical analysis indicated a high level of consensus among participants, as well as significant associations between checklist items. CREAM guidelines represent a step toward enhancing transparency and standardization in case reporting in aesthetic medicine. Adhering to these guidelines will allow authors to contribute to a robust evidence base, prioritize patient safety, and drive advancements aesthetic medicine.

Strengthening Collaborations for Geriatrics Knowledge: Twitter Journal Club for Geriatric Fellows

The pandemic has challenged training programs in numerous ways, specifically in the ability to conduct group based teaching sessions. To overcome this challenge Twitter was examined as a vehicle for engaging Geriatric Fellows in education about critical appraisal of clinical research. A secondary objective was to develop educational synergy among university-based programs. To achieve these aims, 5 Midwestern Geriatric and Palliative Medicine Fellowship programs agreed to enroll their fellows into a monthly Geriatrics Twitter Journal Club, that commences on Twitter Tuesday and lasts a week. Each month, an assigned fellow selects an article to discuss and creates a short video to introduce it. A Twitter meister deliveres structured questions to guide fellows’ collective input on the article being critiqued. Over a 3 month roll out of @GeriatricJC, the twitter account of the journal club has gained 144 followers that includes 20 fellows, 63 geriatricians/geriatric faculty, 28 organizational accounts, 5 students and around 28 other providers and experts. From December 2020- February 2021, account generated tweets resulted in an average of 397 impressions/day with 2548 visits to the account profile per month. Videos posted have averaged 73 views/video. Discussion in journal club using #GeriJC has garnered 178 tweets from participants. This project shows that Twitter is a feasible platform for a fellowship journal club among several training programs, thus expanding expertise in evidence-based medicine while lowering the administrative burden of preparing journal club within a single program and increasing both faculty and trainee convenience of learning.

Expert consensus on the use of human serum albumin in critically ill patients.

Expert consensus on the use of human serum albumin in critically ill patients.

Cognitive levels in testing knowledge in evidence-based medicine: a cross sectional study

BackgroundKnowledge assessment in evidence-based medicine (EBM) is usually performed by the measurement of memorised facts, understanding of EBM concepts and application of learned knowledge in familiar situations, all of which are considered lower-level educational objectives. The aim of this study was to assess EBM knowledge both on higher and lower cognitive levels across EBM topics.MethodsIn order to assess knowledge on different EBM topics across learning levels, we created a knowledge test (Six Progressive Levels in Testing – SPLIT instrument), which consists of 36 multiple choice items and measures knowledge in EBM at six cognitive levels (Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analysing, Evaluating and Creating) and addresses six EBM topics (Evidence-based practice, Internal validity, Clinical importance, Study design, Sources of evidence, Diagnostic studies). Three independent assessors defined the minimum passing score (MPS) for the overall test, based on the first-year course content and educational objectives. The instrument was assessed in a sample of first- (n = 119) and third-year medical students (n = 70) and EBM experts (n = 14).ResultsThe MPS was 16 correct answers out of total 36 questions, and was achieved by 21 out of 119 first-year students, 14 out of 70 third-year students and 9 out of 14 EBM experts (χ2 = 13.3; P < 0.001, with significantly higher proportion of experts passing compared to students). Although experts had the highest scores overall, none of the groups outperformed others on individual cognitive levels, but the experts outperformed students in EBM topics of Study design and Sources of evidence (P = 0.002 and 0.004, respectively, Kruskal-Wallis test). First- and third-year students performed better on specific course topics taught in that study year (Diagnostic studies and Clinical relevance, respectively).ConclusionEBM knowledge of students and experts differ according to the specificities of their education/expertise, but neither group had excellent knowledge in all areas. It may be difficult to develop a knowledge test that includes different EBM topics at different cognitive levels to follow the development of specific and general aspects of EBM knowledge.

Acupuncture and moxibustion therapy for scapulohumeral periarthritis: Protocol for an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis.

Background:Scapulohumeral periarthritis (SP) is a very common painful shoulder disorder. Several systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses have reported the effectiveness of acupuncture for patients with SP. However, the evidence has not been systematically synthesized. This overview aims to map, synthesize, and assess the reliability of evidence generated from these SRs and meta-analyses of acupuncture for SP.Methods:We will electronically search the following databases for literature, regardless of publication status and language: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI); Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM); Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIPdatabase); and Wan-Fang Database. In order to ensure the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the literature retrieval, we will combine the Suggestions of evidence-based medicine experts with the actual situation in the literature retrieval process to formulate the retrieval strategy, and make corresponding records to find the most appropriate retrieval strategy. The reference lists and the citation lists of studies meeting the inclusion criteria and relevant SRs will also be searched to identify further studies for inclusion. Before this review completed, the two reviewers will conduct the searching once again to ensure the latest studies could be included.Ethics and dissemination:Ethical approval is not required for overviews. We plan to publish results in peer-reviewed journals and present at international and national academic, clinical, and patient conferences.Results:The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Conclusion:This overview will provide comprehensive evidence of acupuncture for patients with SP.INPLASY registration number:INPLASY202060020.

Recommendations for respiratory rehabilitation in adults with coronavirus disease 2019.

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is a highly infectious respiratory disease that leads to respiratory, physical, and psychological dysfunction in patients. Respiratory rehabilitation is an important intervention as well as cure for clinical patients. With increased understanding of COVID-19 and the accumulation of clinical experience, we proposed recommendations for respiratory rehabilitation in adults with COVID-19 based on the opinions of frontline clinical experts involved in the management of this epidemic and a review of the relevant literature and evidence. Our recommendations are as follows: 1. for inpatients with COVID-19, respiratory rehabilitation would relieve the symptoms of dyspnea, anxiety, and depression and eventually improve physical functions and the quality of life; 2. for severe/critical inpatients, early respiratory rehabilitation is not suggested; 3. for patients in isolation, respiratory rehabilitation guidance should be conducted through educational videos, instruction manuals, or remote consultation; 4. assessment and monitoring should be performed throughout the respiratory rehabilitation process; 5. proper grade protection should be used following the present guidelines. These recommendations can guide clinical practice and form the basis for respiratory rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients.

A Call to Action: Screening Fathers for Perinatal Depression.

* Abbreviations: AAP — : American Academy of Pediatrics PPD — : postpartum depression In early 2019, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) released a policy statement1 recognizing that “maternal depression affects the whole family” and urging pediatric providers to “incorporate recognition and management of perinatal depression into pediatric practice.” Soon after, the US Preventive Services Task Force issued new recommendations on interventions to prevent perinatal depression.2 The convergence of these 2 statements from nationally recognized bodies of experts in evidence-based medicine underscores the urgency of a heightened focus on screening and making referrals for perinatal depression in pediatric practice. The new recommendations do not go far enough and risk being out of touch with contemporary American families. The US Preventive Services Task Force evidence review and recommendations are focused exclusively on interventions to prevent maternal depression. The AAP statement acknowledged paternal postpartum depression (PPD) as an established clinical problem yet called for pediatricians to screen solely mothers at the 1-, 2-, 4-, and 6-month well-child visits and “consider screening the partner as well” at the 6-month visit. We believe it is inadequate to treat the recognition and management of paternal depression as extra or optional. To promote optimal outcomes for children, pediatric providers must assess the mental health and adjustment to parenting of all new parents, regardless of gender or marital status, and make appropriate referrals for needed care. Fathers’ time spent with children has nearly tripled since 19653; even among unmarried couples, fathers typically want to be and are involved with their children. … Address correspondence to Tova B. Walsh, PhD, School of Social Work, University of Wisconsin, 1350 University Ave, Madison, WI 53706. E-mail: tbwalsh{at}wisc.edu

Development and Validation of a Test for Competence in Evidence-Based Medicine.

Medical educators need valid, reliable, and efficient tools to assess evidence-based medicine (EBM) knowledge and skills. Available EBM assessment tools either do not assess skills or are laborious to grade. To validate a multiple-choice-based EBM test-the Resident EBM Skills Evaluation Tool (RESET). Cross-sectional study. A total of 304 medicine residents from five training programs and 33 EBM experts comprised the validation cohort. Internal reliability, item difficulty, and item discrimination were assessed. Construct validity was assessed by comparing mean total scores of trainees to experts. Experts were also asked to rate importance of each test item to assess content validity. Experts had higher total scores than trainees (35.6 vs. 29.4, P < 0.001) and also scored significantly higher than residents on 11/18 items. Cronbach's alpha was 0.6 (acceptable), and no items had a low item-total correlation. Item difficulty ranged from 7 to 86%. All items were deemed "important" by > 50% of experts. The proposed EBM assessment tool is a reliable and valid instrument to assess competence in EBM. It is easy to administer and grade and could be used to guide and assess interventions in EBM education.

Hospital’s suspension of evidence-based medicine expert sparks new controversy

Hospital’s suspension of evidence-based medicine expert sparks new controversy

The "architect analogy" of evidence-based practice: Reconsidering the role of clinical expertise and clinician experience in evidence-based health care.

The role of expertise in evidence-based medicine (EBM) and practice (EBP) has long been debated. In the early years of the EBP movement, the role of expertise and experience were diminished in clinical decision-making. However, the concepts of EBP are evolving. A more nuanced view of the value of clinician expertise, based on experience and clinical judgement, has emerged. This article proposes that clinical expertise does not belong within the evidence hierarchy's decision-making pyramid as the lowest form of evidence, but rather alongside it, representing a complementary source of knowledge that supports the processes of EBP. An "Architect Analogy of EBP" is proposed as a new model by which to describe this relationship. In this analogy, the clinician's use of expertise is likened to the role of an architect, using evidence as building blocks in the construction of the client's edifice, representing the patients' health and wellbeing. Much as an architect carefully designs the edifice in consultation with the client's needs and preferences, choosing appropriate material (evidence), rejecting faulty material, and ensuring construction stays on course, the clinician must sort through a plethora of sometimes contradictory evidence, evaluate its merits and appropriateness for the patients' unique biopsychosocial circumstances and values, and monitor the effects of interventions on patients' health and wellbeing. The expertise of practitioners, as the architects of EBP, is an important supporting source of knowledge that facilitates the "Five Steps of EBP," informs and facilitates EBP, and supports patient-centred care.

Expertise in evidence-based medicine: a tale of three models

BackgroundExpertise has been a contentious concept in Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM). Especially in the early days of the movement, expertise was taken to be exactly what EBM was rebelling against—the authoritarian pronouncements about “best” interventions dutifully learned in medical schools, sometimes with dire consequences. Since then, some proponents of EBM have tried various ways of reincorporating the idea of expertise into EBM, with mixed results. However, questions remain. Is expertise evidence? If not, what is it good for, if anything?MethodsIn this article, I describe and analyze the three historical models of expertise integration in EBM and discuss the difficulties in putting each into practice. I also examine accounts of expertise from disciplines outside of medicine, including philosophy, sociology, psychology, and science and technology studies to see if these accounts can strengthen and clarify what EBM has to say about expertise.ResultsOf the accounts of expertise discussed here, the Collins and Evans account can do most to clarify the concept of expertise in EBM.ConclusionsWith some additional clarification from EBM proper, theoretical resources from other disciplines might augment the current EBM account of expertise.

Developing a Clinician Friendly Tool to Identify Useful Clinical Practice Guidelines: G-TRUST.

Clinicians are faced with a plethora of guidelines. To rate guidelines, they can select from a number of evaluation tools, most of which are long and difficult to apply. The goal of this project was to develop a simple, easy-to-use checklist for clinicians to use to identify trustworthy, relevant, and useful practice guidelines, the Guideline Trustworthiness, Relevance, and Utility Scoring Tool (G-TRUST). A modified Delphi process was used to obtain consensus of experts and guideline developers regarding a checklist of items and their relative impact on guideline quality. We conducted 4 rounds of sampling to refine wording, add and subtract items, and develop a scoring system. Multiple attribute utility analysis was used to develop a weighted utility score for each item to determine scoring. Twenty-two experts in evidence-based medicine, 17 developers of high-quality guidelines, and 1 consumer representative participated. In rounds 1 and 2, items were rewritten or dropped, and 2 items were added. In round 3, weighted scores were calculated from rankings and relative weights assigned by the expert panel. In the last round, more than 75% of experts indicated 3 of the 8 checklist items to be major indicators of guideline usefulness and, using the AGREE tool as a reference standard, a scoring system was developed to identify guidelines as useful, may not be useful, and not useful. The 8-item G-TRUST is potentially helpful as a tool for clinicians to identify useful guidelines. Further research will focus on its reliability when used by clinicians.

Doctors and numbers: an assessment of the critical risk interpretation test.

Risk interpretation affects decision making. Yet, there is no valid assessment of how clinicians interpret the risk data that they commonly encounter. To establish the reliability and validity of a 20-item test of clinicians' risk interpretation. The Critical Risk Interpretation Test (CRIT) measures clinicians' abilities to 1) modify the interpretation based on meaningful differences in the outcome (e.g., disease specific v. all-cause mortality) and time period (e.g., lifetime v. 10-year mortality), 2) maintain a stable interpretation for different risk framings (e.g., relative v. absolute risk), and 3) correctly interpret how diagnostic testing modifies risk. There were 658 clinicians and medical trainees who participated: 116 nurse practitioners (NPs) at a national conference, 273 medical students at 1 institution, 148 residents in internal medicine at 2 institutions, and 121 internists at 1 institution. Participants completed a self-administered paper test during educational conferences. Seventeen evidence-based medicine experts took the test online and formally assessed content validity. Eighteen second-year medical students were recruited to take the test and a retest 3 weeks later to explore test-retest correlation. Expert review supported test clarity and content validity. Factor analysis supported that the CRIT identifies at least 3 separable areas of clinician knowledge. Test-retest correlation was fair (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.65; standard error = 0.15). Scores on our test correlated with other tests of related abilities. Mean test scores varied among groups, with differences in prior evidence-based medicine training and experience (93 for NPs, 101 for medical students, 101 for residents, 103 for academic internists, and 110 for physician experts; P < 0.001). Our results provide supporting evidence for the reliability and validity of the CRIT as an index of critical risk interpretation abilities, which is acceptable and feasible to administer in an educational setting.

Characteristics of evidence-based medicine training in Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada emergency medicine residencies - a national survey of program directors.

BackgroundRecent surveys suggest few emergency medicine (EM) training programs have formal evidence-based medicine (EBM) or journal club curricula. Our primary objective was to describe the methods of EBM training in Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) EM residencies. Secondary objectives were to explore attitudes regarding current educational practices including e-learning, investigate barriers to journal club and EBM education, and assess the desire for national collaboration.MethodsA 16-question survey containing binary, open-ended, and 5-pt Likert scale questions was distributed to the 14 RCPSC-EM program directors. Proportions of respondents (%), median, and IQR are reported.ResultsThe response rate was 93% (13/14). Most programs (85%) had established EBM curricula. Curricula content was delivered most frequently via journal club, with 62% of programs having 10 or more sessions annually. Less than half of journal clubs (46%) were led consistently by EBM experts. Four programs did not use a critical appraisal tool in their sessions (31%). Additional teaching formats included didactic and small group sessions, self-directed e-learning, EBM workshops, and library tutorials. 54% of programs operated educational websites with EBM resources. Program directors attributed highest importance to two core goals in EBM training curricula: critical appraisal of medical literature, and application of literature to patient care (85% rating 5 - “most importance”, respectively). Podcasts, blogs, and online journal clubs were valued for EBM teaching roles including creating exposure to literature (4, IQR 1.5) and linking literature to clinical practice experience (4, IQR 1.5) (1-no merit, 5-strong merit). Five of thirteen respondents rated lack of expert leadership and trained faculty educators as potential limitations to EBM education. The majority of respondents supported the creation of a national unified EBM educational resource (4, IQR 1) (1-no support, 5- strongly support).ConclusionsRCPSC-EM programs have established EBM teaching curricula and deliver content most frequently via journal club. A lack of EBM expert educators may limit content delivery at certain sites. Program directors supported the nationalization of EBM educational resources. A growing usage of electronic resources may represent an avenue to link national EBM educational expertise, facilitating future collaborative educational efforts.

Novak et al. reply

[Extract] SIR–In responding to the letters that have been sent regarding our paper, it is clear we are all passionate about our own specialities; at the same time we believe that the optimal well-being of children with cerebral palsy (CP) must remain at the centre of this debate. We take this opportunity to state that we strongly uphold the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM), wherein the integration of clinical expertise, client values, and best evidence is considered paramount to quality clinical decision-making. The purpose of a systematic review is to summarize the best available evidence. We provided such a summary, but this should not be misread as a clinical ‘cookbook’. We concur with EBM experts that, ‘Systematic reviews can define the boundaries of what is known and what is not known. . . Systematic reviews can aid, but can never replace, sound clinical reasoning.’

From biomarkers to medical tests: The changing landscape of test evaluation

Regulators and healthcare payers are increasingly demanding evidence that biomarkers deliver patient benefits to justify their use in clinical practice. Laboratory professionals need to be familiar with these evidence requirements to better engage in biomarker research and decisions about their appropriate use.This paper by a multidisciplinary group of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine describes the pathway of a laboratory assay measuring a biomarker to becoming a medically useful test. We define the key terms, principles and components of the test evaluation process. Unlike previously described linearly staged models, we illustrate how the essential components of analytical and clinical performances, clinical and cost-effectiveness and the broader impact of testing assemble in a dynamic cycle. We highlight the importance of defining clinical goals and how the intended application of the biomarker in the clinical pathway should drive each component of test evaluation. This approach emphasizes the interaction of the different components, and that clinical effectiveness data should be fed back to refine analytical and clinical performances to achieve improved outcomes.The framework aims to support the understanding of key stakeholders. The laboratory profession needs to strengthen collaboration with industry and experts in evidence-based medicine, regulatory bodies and policy makers for better decisions about the use of new and existing medical tests.

Society of interventional radiology critique and commentary on the cochrane report on transarterial chemoembolization

Society of interventional radiology critique and commentary on the cochrane report on transarterial chemoembolization