Use Of Evidence-based Decision Research Articles

Addressing Barriers to Evidence-Based Practice: Using Evidence-Based Decision Making and High-Leverage Practices to Meet Student Needs

For the last decade, educators have been directed to use evidence-based practices in their classrooms. However, despite this direction, the use of these practices is not widespread in many classrooms. Though many resources exist to help educators locate and select these practices educators face barriers which make these practices infeasible or inappropriate for use in their classrooms. In this circumstance, educators can use evidence-based decision making to (1) address the barriers to using an evidence-based practice, (2) locate non-evidence-based practices (non-EBPs) with promising or mixed effects that meet student needs and are feasible in the classroom, (3) adapt Non-EBPs using High Leverage Practices to boost effectiveness, and (4) monitor progress closely using Data-Based Individualization to ensure the occurrence of student benefit. The use of evidence-based decision making provides a framework for educators to implement effective interventions in their classrooms.

Transforming conservation: a practical guide to evidence and decision making ed. by William J. Sutherland

Reviewed by: Transforming conservation: a practical guide to evidence and decision making ed. by William J. Sutherland Catherine Dalton Transforming conservation: a practical guide to evidence and decision making Edited by William J. Sutherland (Open Book Publishers 2022; 428 pages (xvi+412); DOI: https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0321) Transforming conservation: a practical guide to evidence and decision making follows on from the work of the Conservation Evidence project, which has collated evidence on the policy and practices for maintaining and restoring biodiversity over the last twenty years. The project thesis is that there is ineffective use of evidence in conservation efforts, compounded by problematic political decisions, resource waste and ultimately the loss of public and political support for many initiatives. The systematic use of evidence-based decision making in the fields of medicine (and surgery in particular) and aircraft safety are cited as exemplars that have facilitated meaningful change. The authors contend that environmental managers do not generally use scientific evidence to support their decision making. Instead, they rely mainly on personal experience, anecdotal information and the advice of colleagues. The failure to use an evidence-based approach occurs even when the information is easily available, when there are conflicts of interest, when quick or audacious decisions are made, or there is evidence complacency. The authors believe that there are considerable problems with how conservation decisions are usually made and that the decision-making process needs to be taken more seriously, particularly in light of the current biodiversity crisis. The book advocates that successful decision making requires a combination of scientific evidence, clear values, experience and local knowledge. To help embed evidence into practice, a handbook (toolkit) of considerations and tactics has been created in this volume. The long term aim is that there will be transformational change in the use of evidence in conservation. This Open Access book is a composite of literature review, example scenarios, methodological processes and checklists to guide best practices. The book is composed of four parts (identifying the problem, obtaining/assessing/summarising evidence, making and applying decisions, and transforming society) comprising twelve chapters written by 76 experts with over 1,000 collaborators. Over 391 pages the authors exhaustively document twelve stages in the decision-making process, from problems of identification, multiple considerations, the steps involved in the development of the conservation evidence portals, through the facilitation of change. This is very much a practical handbook and comprehensive information is provided on each stage of the process. Individual chapters focus on assessing single pieces of evidence, assessing collated evidence, and converting evidence into conclusions, that can then be the basis for decision making, with material repeated in long tabular form. Solutions are synthesised in to 12 downloadable checklists, four of which are spread across the book from page 56 to page 337 and eight co-located in the concluding chapter (chapter 12). Chapters benefit from summary introductions but stop abruptly with no concluding points. Some chapters are replete with a range of illustrative conservation examples from the literature, others are much more methodological with few or no examples. The authors outline how information and source reliability, and relevance, are key to evaluating the available evidence and facilitate the identification of unreliable, irrelevant and untrustworthy material. The book is aimed at policy makers and practitioners, whose challenge is to deal with multiple specific and generic components (e.g. ecology, communities, markets, economics, legislation and technology) when making conservation decisions. The book attempts to make sense of these diverse components and provide a step-by-step guide on how to marshal the evidence and systemise the process so that more effective decisions can be made. While examining the book, I was reminded of our recent contribution to Ireland's National Biodiversity Action Plan 2023–2027, as part of the public consultation process. The draft plan is a mix of both laudable and pedestrian aspirations, couched in benign language, and many of its targets seem inadequate in the context of the biodiversity and climate crises that we face. Missing also from the current draft is a clear integrated approach to logging evidence, measurement and auditing of indicators, thus making the demonstration of real success problematic. In...

Evidence-based decision making and promotion of physical activity among directors of local health departments.

ABSTRACTOBJECTIVE To describe the steps involved in evidence-based decision making for the implementation of programs aimed at the promotion of physical activity.METHODS It is a descriptive, cross-sectional study with quali-quantitative approach, held with municipal health secretaries chosen deliberately by regional health representatives of the state of Paraná. A total of 27 secretaries participated in a telephone interview consisting of 17 open questions. Content analysis was conducted according to the categories of an evidence-based decision-making model consisting of seven steps.RESULTS None of the participants employed every step of the evidence-based decision-making model. The steps that were most often mentioned included: evaluation of the program (33.3%), use of evidence from the literature (22.2%) and identification of the problem (22.2%). The steps that were reported the least included: quantification of the problem (14.8%), development and prioritization of actions (14.8%), development of the plan of action (14.8%) and evaluation of the community (3.7%).CONCLUSIONS The use of evidence-based decision making in the context of the promotion of physical activity was shown to be incipient among the health secretaries of the state of Paraná. We suggest widening dissemination and training on the use of evidence-based decision making among municipal administrators to increase the effectiveness of actions for promotion of physical activity.

Nurse-Perceived Barriers to the Implementation of Nondirected Pushing

Over the past 20 years evidence-based decision making has become a key ingredient to providing quality nursing care. The use of evidence-based decision making in nursing was first demonstrated by the research utilization movement in the 1990s as nursing developed strategies to apply research evidence to nursing practice. At the turn of the century, evidence-based practice in nursing evolved as the key to promote positive patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness while ensuring accountability and transparency. Evidence-based practice in nursing combines empirical research, expert opinion, best practices, patient preferences, and other sources of data to provide high-quality patient care. Evidence-based practice in nursing has been well received by many nursing specialties. However, its implementation in perinatal nursing is suspect. Many perinatal nursing practices are not evidence based.

Building speech-language pathologist capacity for evidence-based practice: A unique graduate course approach

A speech-language pathology graduate-level course using the systematic review and meta-analytic process as a learning tool is described. The course design, content, activities, and pedagogical methods are discussed in depth. Three groups of students worked collaboratively to produce three systematic reviews in the area of language and literacy. This course provided a framework for the completion of the reviews and the development of the students as expert consumers of research. It is suggested that this course framework be used as a tool for building speech-language pathologist capacity in the use of evidence-based decision making. Source of funding: No source of funding reported.

Collaboration in research protocol design: A case study exploring knowledge creation for the pharmaceutical industry and prescribing physicians

The pharmaceutical industry is under increasing pressure to bring innovative products to market in a timely manner. Without access to information from people outside the industry, this task is more difficult. Because physicians may have a greater understanding of specific product benefits in a clinical setting, knowledge creation within the pharmaceutical industry can be facilitated through active physician participation in clinical trial design, thereby delivering more effective use of medicines. Ultimately, knowledge creation efforts may enhance the use of evidence-based decision making and improve professional practice, which in turn will promote innovation in service and product development. The study aims to examine the potential for knowledge creation through collaboration between physicians and industry representatives. Eight physicians specialising in a specific disease agreed to meet with three industry representatives who organise clinical trials. The primary endpoint for this study was to design a phase IV clinical trial with collaborating physicians that specifically addressed a medical need within a highly specialised area of medicine. After meeting with industry representatives, the physicians concluded that company-sponsored studies were not appropriate, and any potential research should be conducted on a small scale (pilot and exploratory) within a clinical setting. The collaboration formed in this study failed to produce the intended result of a phase IV research protocol. Physicians were, however, able to steer the industry representatives towards research sponsorship that would – in their opinion – best serve the interests of improved patient outcomes. These findings support the importance of knowledge creation through collaboration between physicians and pharmaceutical companies.

Evidence-Based Decision Making in Action: Part 2 – Evaluating and Applying the Clinical Evidence

This is the second of a two-part series addressing the use of evidence-based decision making (EBDM) in the use of home bleaching. In Part 1, a case scenario demonstrated the skills involved in (1) structuring a clinical question and (2) conducting an online search using PubMed.1 Part 2 demonstrates the third and fourth steps in the EBDM process, i.e., (3) critical appraisal to assess the validity of a study and (4) applying that information to clinical decision making. This 4-step approach to EBDM recognizes that clinicians can never be completely current with all conditions, medications, materials, and products. Thus, EBDM provides a mechanism for addressing these gaps in knowledge in order to provide the best care possible.

Evidence-based clinical practice.

Healthcare professionals are trying to facilitate the use of evidence-based decision making for individual patients and patient populations they are privileged to serve. The authors describe an evidence-based multidisciplinary clinical practice model developed at the University of Colorado Hospital along with a clinical example of how the model was used to improve quality and decrease costs.