OPEN ACCESSDecember 19, 2014Using Evidence to Inform Risk or Harm Decisions Laurel Murrow, MD, MSc, Gerald Crites, MD, MEd, Donald Goggans, MD, Julie Gaines, MLIS, Jennifer Stowe, MS, W. Scott Richardson, MD Laurel Murrow, MD, MSc GRU/UGA Medical Partnership Google Scholar More articles by this author , Gerald Crites, MD, MEd Medical College of Georgia at Georgia Regents University Google Scholar More articles by this author , Donald Goggans, MD Medical College of Georgia at Georgia Regents University Google Scholar More articles by this author , Julie Gaines, MLIS Medical College of Georgia at Georgia Regents University Google Scholar More articles by this author , Jennifer Stowe, MS Medical College of Georgia at Georgia Regents University Google Scholar More articles by this author , W. Scott Richardson, MD Medical College of Georgia at Georgia Regents University Google Scholar More articles by this author https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.9990 SectionsAbout ToolsDownload Citations ShareFacebookTwitterEmail Abstract Introduction: Numerous studies have demonstrated that many physicians lack fundamental skills in interpreting and using clinical care evidence. We hypothesized that building a foundation for evidence-based medicine (EBM) prior to the clinical years would provide an initial scaffold that could be integrated during clinical training. Many schools have interpreted LCME standard ED-17 as synonymous with instruction in EBM. Methods: This was one of nine modules in EBM skills for first-year and second-year medical students, who were novices in EBM knowledge. The two-part module began with a 2-hour, in-class didactic covering the fundamental features of risk and harm studies, including internal study validity, and study results. Between 1 and 14 days later, students then participated in a 2-hour interactive large-group EBM exercise during which they applied their knowledge and practiced forming judgments for overall study validity. The large-group exercise is based on principles of team-based learning (TBL), but does not follow them exactly. Results: We performed a pre-post assessment of alternative items (10 pre, 12 post) covering the same objectives. The preassessment scores were 175 correct and 215 incorrect (difficulty 44.87%). Postassessment scores were 421 correct and 47 incorrect (difficulty 89.96%). Discussion: The mode of instruction is highly adaptable. In previous years, the module followed strict TBL pedagogy for the application exercise, and this EBM exercise can easily be converted back to a traditional TBL by having teams simultaneously report answers using whiteboards or flipcharts and then debating their choices. In addition, the initial didactic session can be prerecorded for students to review before class. Educational Objectives By the end of the didactic session, learners will be able to: List examples of why we need evidence for risk or harm.Define the following terms: cause/causality, etiology, diagnosis, confounding variables, contributing factors, association, risk, harm, risk factor, prognostic factor, and protective factor.Given an example of a factor, differentiate between a risk factor and a protective factor.Describe and compare the characteristics, design features, and strengths of the two study designs for risk or harm studies (i.e., cohort and case-control). By the end of the interactive large-group EBM exercise, learners will be able to: Correctly identify whether confounders are present in a given clinical study for risk/harm.Correctly identify if a given clinical study for risk/harm possesses any risk for surveillance or recall bias effects.Identify whether a given cohort study had inappropriate length of follow-up or incomplete follow-up (using the 5/20 rule for the latter).Demonstrate how to use three of the four rules of causation (biological sense excluded from demonstration) for a given clinical study for risk/harm.Judge whether a study's overall (i.e., internal) validity is enough to recommend using it in risk decisions.Correctly interpret a table or figure of results for statistical significance (p values, confidence intervals), odds ratios, and relative risks. Sign up for the latest publications from MedEdPORTAL Add your email below FILES INCLUDEDReferencesRelatedDetails FILES INCLUDED Included in this publication: Instructor's Guide.pdf Facilitator's Copy.pdf Template-Risk Module.pdf Using Evidence for Risk or Harm Decisions.pptx Completed Application Exercise Worksheet.pdf Practice Problems for Results.pdf To view all publication components, extract (i.e., unzip) them from the downloaded .zip file. Download editor’s noteThis publication may contain technology or a display format that is no longer in use. CitationMurrow L, Crites G, Goggans D, Gaines J, Stowe J, Richardson WS. Using Evidence to Inform Risk or Harm Decisions. MedEdPORTAL. 2014;10:9990. https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.9990 Related Using Evidence to Inform Risk or Harm Decisions Using Evidence to Inform Prognosis Decisions Using Randomized Controlled Trials for Treatment Decisions Copyright & Permissions© 2014 Murrow et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives license.KeywordsHarmCohortStudy ValidityEBMCase-Control StudiesTeam-Based LearningCase-ControlRiskEvidence-Based MedicineTBL Disclosures None to report. Funding/Support None to report. Loading ...