Week 4: Evidence Types Flashcards
Reviewing literature occurs in 2 phases; what are they? Explain what primary and secondary sources of information are.
ROL occurs in 2 phases
1) preliminary review: to achieve general understanding
2) extensive review to provide a detailed understanding and to refine research questions.
Primary source: a document provided directly from the author (original research publication)
Secondary source: a description or review if one or more primary sources. (Narrative review article, textbook)
Explain what peer review articles involve
A peer reviewed journal is one that has submitted most of its published articles for review by experts who are not part of the editorial staff.
- blinded peer review minimises bias
- peer reviewed journals rely on experts in the field who have agreed to review manuscripts to judge wether or not they should be accepted for publication, and to recommend any changes that may be necessary
What peer reviewers should look for…
- The topic of investigation should be important, original and worth reporting
- Allusions to other published research should be accurate
- Appropriate research methods should be employed
- Data collection and the resulting statistical analysis should be carried out correctly
- The manuscripts assertions should be logically and clearly stated.
- The manuscript should be well written and organised
- The writing style should be of high quality
- Spelling and grammar should be correct
Trade journals and magazines
- are only reviewed by editors who determines wether the topic is of interest to readers
- this article is then edited for grammar and spelling by staff member
Indexing
- The inclusiom of certain journals in a list that becomes partvof a database
- Journals must be of high-quality to be accepted for inclusion in many databases
- also must include research that is relevant to the databases area if emphasis
Medline
To be included in MEDLINE, journals must
- be peer reviewed
- have high quality content, editorial work, printing and layout
- have an audience consisting of health professionals
- have adequate geographic coverage
- have a good publishing track record
Evidence sources Textbooks Conferences Information obtained from colleagues Journal articles Secondary sources
Textbooks: provide useful background info, although they aren’t very current, online ones are better as they are updated often.
Conferences: typically most up to date info, however not very effective in teaching adult learners, practitioners quite often don’t change their behaviour after them
Information obtained from colleages: useful but potentially bias and unreliable. One should obtain copies of the sources that the colleague has relied on.
Journal articles: vitally important to EBP, however there is an overwhelming quantity of them, several newsletters are available that provide synopsis on articles.
Secondary sources for journal articles of value: secondary sources are often the first choice for evidence because the articles have been pre-appraised.
Features if high-quality scholarly journals
Unpretentious appearance
-few glossy pages or exciting pictures
-usually include illustrations, graphs and charts
Articles are written by experts in the field who are actively conducting research
-language assumes that reader gas a scholarly background.
-articles always provide the sources of information in the reference section
-primary function of scholarly journals is to report the results of research to other scholars
Impact factors:
Why? Where? What?
Why?
-to evaluate the worth of the journal (often tracked by professionals)
-rank journals within a discipline
-help authors decide where to publish your article for maximum impact
-evaluation for promotion/ grants or in some countries government funding of an institution.
Where?
-journal citation reports
-web of science- you look at additional information to see impact factor in the Journal citation reports
What? What is it how is it calculated?
Eg impact factor for the journal ‘spine’
Number of times articles or other items published in cell during 2006-2007 were cited in index journals during 2008/ number of ‘citable’ articles published in cell in 2006 and 2007
Professional newsletters
An alternate way to obtain current information
- the newsletter editor has already read and critiqued the articles
- requires much less time and knowledge of research than reading journals and articles
- shouldn’t be your only means of staying current though
- they are useful as an introduction and guide to articles
- you should assess the quality of the newsletter before subscribing
Evaluating a newsletters quality
Qualification of the editorial board
-acknowledged experts in the field should be represented
-be wary if there is no editorial board, only one editors or the board members are unfamiliar
Sponsorship
-practice management companies or equipment manufacturers may have an agenda that influences opinions
Websites
Most useful websites are sponsored by medical groups
-they often provide valuable info, but it may be against chiropractic
Name the useful websites often used
- Centre for evidence based medicine
- a free website designed to help develop, disseminate, and evaluate resources that can be used to practice evidence based medicine - Cochrane library
- current info on the effects if interventions in health care
- designed to provide info and evidence to support health care decisions and to inform those receiving care (cost $285 a year)
- includes systematic reviews that are updated by the cochrane group - Emedecine
- the largest and most current clinical knowledge base
- content undergoes 4levels of peer review
- articles in 7000 diseases and disorders
- access is free - Chiropractic resource organisation
- individual chiros are responsible for the info contained in his/her section. Is not peer reviewed - The Merk manual of diagnosis and therapy
- a large pharmaceutical company
- free searchable online textbook that covers subjects relevant to internal medicine
Evaluating health websites
-be cautious of websites that are overly optimistic or pessimistic on a given topic
-only call attention to one side of an argument and disregard conflicting research findings
Indications of an unreliable website
-makes sweeping generalisations
-half-truths
-points to rare and extreme practices
What are the 4 Standards for evaluation of websites?
- Authorship: the authors affiliations and qualifications of should be listed
- Attribution: references and sources of information should be provided
- also copy right information - Disclosure: ownership and sponsorship should be fully disclosed and prominently displayed
- Currency: dates that the website content was posted or updated should be provided
