Need for evidence synthesis for quality control of healthcare decision-making

IF 1.7 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Nepal Journal of Epidemiology Pub Date : 2023-12-23 DOI:10.3126/nje.v13i3.61004
B. Sathian, E. V. Van Teijlingen, Israel Junior Borges Do Nascimento, M. Khatib, Indrajit Banerjee, P. Simkhada, Russell Kabir, Hanadi Al Hamad
{"title":"Need for evidence synthesis for quality control of healthcare decision-making","authors":"B. Sathian, E. V. Van Teijlingen, Israel Junior Borges Do Nascimento, M. Khatib, Indrajit Banerjee, P. Simkhada, Russell Kabir, Hanadi Al Hamad","doi":"10.3126/nje.v13i3.61004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Systematic reviews that are out-of-date delay policymaking, create controversy, and can erode trust in research. To avoid this issue, it is preferable to keep summaries of the study evidence. Living evidence is a synthesis approach that provides up-to-date rigorous research evidence summaries to decision-makers. This strategy is particularly useful in rapidly expanding research domains, uncertain existing evidence, and new research that may impact policy or practice, ensuring that physicians have access to the most recent evidence. Addressing global challenges – ranging from public health crises to climate change or political instability - requires evidence-based judgements. An obsolete, biased, or selective information poses risks of poor decisions and resource misallocation. The relatively nascent practice of living evidence proves invaluable in maintaining continuous interest and team engagement. The concept of living evidence has been particularly relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the rapidly evolving nature of the virus, the urgent need for timely information, and the continuous emergence of new research findings. Although the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of evidence systems, researchers and funders of research should rigorously test the living-evidence model across diverse domains to further advance and optimize its methodology.","PeriodicalId":43600,"journal":{"name":"Nepal Journal of Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nepal Journal of Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3126/nje.v13i3.61004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Systematic reviews that are out-of-date delay policymaking, create controversy, and can erode trust in research. To avoid this issue, it is preferable to keep summaries of the study evidence. Living evidence is a synthesis approach that provides up-to-date rigorous research evidence summaries to decision-makers. This strategy is particularly useful in rapidly expanding research domains, uncertain existing evidence, and new research that may impact policy or practice, ensuring that physicians have access to the most recent evidence. Addressing global challenges – ranging from public health crises to climate change or political instability - requires evidence-based judgements. An obsolete, biased, or selective information poses risks of poor decisions and resource misallocation. The relatively nascent practice of living evidence proves invaluable in maintaining continuous interest and team engagement. The concept of living evidence has been particularly relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the rapidly evolving nature of the virus, the urgent need for timely information, and the continuous emergence of new research findings. Although the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of evidence systems, researchers and funders of research should rigorously test the living-evidence model across diverse domains to further advance and optimize its methodology.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医疗决策质量控制需要证据综述
过时的系统综述会延误政策制定,引起争议,并可能削弱对研究的信任。为避免这一问题,最好保留研究证据摘要。活证据是一种综合方法,可为决策者提供最新的严格研究证据摘要。这一策略对于快速扩展的研究领域、不确定的现有证据以及可能影响政策或实践的新研究尤为有用,可确保医生获得最新证据。应对全球挑战--从公共卫生危机到气候变化或政治不稳定--需要基于证据的判断。过时、有偏见或选择性的信息会带来决策失误和资源分配不当的风险。事实证明,相对新兴的 "活证据 "实践在保持持续关注和团队参与方面非常有价值。在 COVID-19 大流行期间,"活证据 "的概念尤为重要,因为病毒的性质迅速演变,迫切需要及时的信息,而且新的研究成果不断涌现。尽管 COVID-19 大流行加速了证据系统的采用,但研究人员和研究资助者应在不同领域严格测试活证据模式,以进一步推进和优化其方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nepal Journal of Epidemiology
Nepal Journal of Epidemiology PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
10.30%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: The Nepal Journal of Epidemiology is a international journal that encompasses all aspects of epidemiology. The journal encourages communication among those engaged in the research, teaching, and application of epidemiology of both communicable and non-communicable disease, including research into health services and medical care. Also covered are new methods, epidemiological and statistical, for the analysis of data used by those who practise social and preventive medicine. It provides the most up-to-date, original, well designed, well interpreted and significant information source in the multidisciplinary field of epidemiology. We publish manuscripts based on the following sections: 1.Short communications 2.Current research trends 3.Original research 4.Case reports 5.Review articles 6.Letter to editor
期刊最新文献
Clinical features and management approaches for Urinary Incontinence in Older Adults: Evidence from Three Hospitals in Qatar. Identifying Dementia research priority for Qatar national dementia research plan: A Cross-sectional Survey. One year analysis of Prospective Memory Clinics Registry in Qatar: A Critical Tool for Dementia Research and Policy Planning. Preliminary findings from the Delirium and Population Health Informatics Cohort (DELPHIC) - Qatar Study. Urgent need for better quality control, standards and regulation for the Large Language Models used in healthcare domain.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1