Research: Lecture 1 Flashcards
(25 cards)
full level of IRB review
- more than just minimal risks
- sensitive topic
- minors
-ENTIRE board reviews
expedited level of IRB
- no more risk than expected in daily life
- non-interventional studies
- non-sensitive nature (even if not anonymous)
- non-invasive imaging
-collection or meta-analysis
-SUBSET of board reviews
exempt level of IRB
- pose little risk
- do NOT involve sensitive topic
- anonymous questionnaires
- retrospective data
- CHAIR gives review
evidence based practice
integration of best available evidence, clinical expertise, and patient values/circumstances when evaluating and treating patients and clients
PICO
Patient or Problem
Intervention
Comparison Intervention
Outcomes
primary versus secondary resources
primary: original research
secondary: predigested research
examples of primary resources
RCTs
Cohort studies
case controlled studies, case series
examples of secondary resources
systematic reviews
meta-analysis
level vs. grades in hierarchies
levels: individual study
grades: summarizes multiple
Hierarchy of Evidence: CEBM levels
stronger evidence → weaker evidence
1a: systematic reviews of RCTs
1b: RCT (narrow CI)
1c: all or none
2a: systematic review of cohort studies
2b: cohort study or low quality RCT
2c: outcomes research
3a: systematic review of case control studies
3b: individual case-control study
4: case reports
5: expert opinion without any critical appraisal, bench research
hierarchy of evidence: grades
strong evidence → weaker evidence
A: strong evidence
B: moderate evidence
C: weak evidence
D: conflicting evidence
E: theoretical/foundational evidence
F: expert opinion
grade A evidence
a preponderance of level I and/or level II studies support the recommendation
must include at least 1 level I study
grade B evidence
a single high quality RCT or a preponderance of level II studies support the recommendation
grade C evidence
a single level II study or a preponderance of level II and IV studies including statements of consensus by content experts support the recommendation
grade D evidence
higher quality studies conducted on this topics disagree
grade E evidence
a preponderance of evidence from animal or cadaver studies, from conceptual models/principles, or from basic sciences/bench research support this conclusion
grade F evidence
best practice based on the clinical experience alone
PEDro
a tool to measure the quality of a RCT
scores range from 0-10 (6+ = high quality)
Quadas
a tool to measure the quality of a study that investigates the diagnostic accuracy of a test
7+/14 is high quality
how many key terms are listed
3-7
an abstract is ______ words or less
150
null hypothesis
there will be no difference or relationship between X and Y (don’t need to include)
alternative hypothesis
there will be a difference or relationship between X and Y
power analysis
done prior to determine the number of participants needed to find a significant difference.
- based on effect size
