Meta-analyses and systematic reviews of psychological treatments for chronic pain: Relevance to an evidence-based practice.

2007 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beverly E. Thorn ◽  
Tony H. Cross ◽  
Barbara B. Walker
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Psychological Treatments ◽  
Meta Analyses

A Primer on Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: Part I

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 160-164
Author(s):  
Stuart Fisher ◽  
Melissa J Pearson ◽  
Neil A. Smart
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Exercise Physiology ◽  
Moderate Intensity ◽  
Forest Plot ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Aerobic Activity ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACT The conduct of systematic reviews and meta-analyses are a cornerstone source of information required for evidence-based practice in all medical and allied health professions. Meta-analyses are important in the exercise sciences because, for instance, sometimes many small underpowered studies may suggest the optimal treatment deviates from the generic guidelines that suggest 30 minutes to 60 minutes of moderate intensity aerobic activity 3 to 5 times weekly, supplemented by 1 or more sessions of resistance exercise. A systematic review and meta-analysis can help by combining studies to increase power and provide an answer. The signature method of presenting results of meta-analyses is the forest plot, and an ability to interpret these data and the associated funnel plots are essential to the practice of evidence-based exercise programming. This work describes the processes of systematic review and meta-analysis and informs the reader on how these works may be presented, interpreted, and applied. Some examples from the field of kinesiology and exercise physiology are presented to illustrate how the results of a meta-analysis may influence evidence-based practice.

scholarly journals Comments about the appraisal of systematic reviews in restorative dentistry

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 442
Author(s):  
Kelvin I. Afrashtehfar
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Restorative Dentistry ◽  
Meta Analyses

Adequate adoption of evidence-based practice is deeply rooted in accessing methodological quality and completeness of systematic reviews and meta-analyses reporting. Nonetheless, this assumption might be flawed if the methodological quality assessment has not been properly conducted. Taking the former statement into consideration, this correspondence article encourages the improvement of future methodological quality assessment manuscripts, especially in the field of restorative dentistry. Thus, this article addresses a methodological quality assessment about systematic reviews in restorative dentistry by Sarkis-Onofre et al. in the May 2019 issue of the Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry as an example of appraising appraisals of reviews for increasing the awareness of reviewers, authors, and readers.

scholarly journals Evidence-based Practice in Speech Language Pathology: Scaling Up

2008 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-12
Author(s):  
Laura M. Justice
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Scaling Up ◽  
The United States ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Speech Language Pathology ◽  
Language Pathology ◽  
Meta Analyses

Evidence-based practice is a process to which clinical professionals adhere when making decisions concerning the assessment or treatment o f a given condition. Within the field of speech-language pathology, it is increasingly advocated as best practice. As our profession seeks to transform itself from one that is primarily craft-based to one that relies on evidence-based processes, it must develop and implement a series of structures that will foster this transformation. This article describes three specific structures that are increasingly available within the field of speech-language pathology in the United States to guide transformation of the profession: systematic reviews and meta-analyses, treatment studies, and clearing houses. Without these structural supports, it is unlikely that evidence-based practice can be scaled u pin a way that has positive impacts on practice.

scholarly journals Comments about the appraisal of systematic reviews in restorative dentistry

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 442
Author(s):  
Kelvin I. Afrashtehfar
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Restorative Dentistry ◽  
Overview Of Reviews ◽  
Meta Analyses

Adequate adoption of evidence-based practice is deeply rooted in accessing methodological quality and completeness of systematic reviews and meta-analyses reporting. Nonetheless, this assumption might be flawed if the methodological quality assessment has not been properly conducted. Taking the former statement into consideration, this correspondence article encourages the improvement of future tertiary manuscripts, especially in the field of restorative dentistry. Thus, this article addresses an overview of reviews in restorative dentistry by Sarkis-Onofre et al. in the May 2019 issue of the Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry as an example of evaluating tertiary evidence for increasing the awareness of reviewers, authors, and readers.

Evidence-Based Practice: The Cochrane Collaboration, and Occupational Therapy

1998 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 144-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robyn L. Hayes ◽  
John J. McGrath
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Occupational Therapists ◽  
Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Cochrane Collaboration

This paper describes how occupational therapists can become involved in the Cochrane Collaboration — a well-developed tool for facilitating the involvement of health professionals and lay people in evidence-based practice. The Cochrane Collaboration is a growing international project intended to systematically locate, conduct systematic reviews (including metaanalyses) of, and disseminate information on all available randomised controlled trials of interventions in any area of health. In particular, occupational therapists can use the Cochrane Collaboration to become better informed about best practice and evaluate research in their areas of interest, and learn skills related to conducting randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.

scholarly journals Comparative Effectiveness Research: Using Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses to Synthesize Empirical Evidence

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 191-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria C. Katapodi ◽  
Laurel L. Northouse
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness Research ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Effectiveness Research ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Research Studies

The increased demand for evidence-based health care practices calls for comparative effectiveness research (CER), namely the generation and synthesis of research evidence to compare the benefits and harms of alternative methods of care. A significant contribution of CER is the systematic identification and synthesis of available research studies on a specific topic. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of methodological issues pertaining to systematic reviews and meta-analyses to be used by investigators with the purpose of conducting CER. A systematic review or meta-analysis is guided by a research protocol, which includes (a) the research question, (b) inclusion and exclusion criteria with respect to the target population and studies, © guidelines for obtaining relevant studies, (d) methods for data extraction and coding, (e) methods for data synthesis, and (f ) guidelines for reporting results and assessing for bias. This article presents an algorithm for generating evidence-based knowledge by systematically identifying, retrieving, and synthesizing large bodies of research studies. Recommendations for evaluating the strength of evidence, interpreting findings, and discussing clinical applicability are offered.

scholarly journals Nutritional interventions to improve muscle mass, muscle strength, and physical performance in older people: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelien Gielen ◽  
David Beckwée ◽  
Andreas Delaere ◽  
Sandra De Breucker ◽  
Maurits Vandewoude ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Muscle Mass ◽  
Physical Performance ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Umbrella Review ◽  
Belgian Society ◽  
Nutritional Interventions ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Context Sarcopenia is a progressive and generalized skeletal muscle disorder associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes such as falls, disability, and death. The Belgian Society of Gerontology and Geriatrics has developed evidence-based guidelines for the prevention and treatment of sarcopenia. This umbrella review presents the results of the Working Group on Nutritional Interventions. Objective The aim of this umbrella review was to provide an evidence-based overview of nutritional interventions targeting sarcopenia or at least 1 of the 3 sarcopenia criteria (ie, muscle mass, muscle strength, or physical performance) in persons aged ≥ 65 years. Data sources Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for systematic reviews and meta-analyses reporting the effect of nutritional supplementation on sarcopenia or muscle mass, strength, or physical performance. Data extraction Two authors extracted data on the key characteristics of the reviews, including participants, treatment, and outcomes. Methodological quality of the reviews was assessed using the product A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews. Three authors synthesized the extracted data and generated recommendations on the basis of an overall synthesis of the effects of each intervention. Quality of evidence was rated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Data analysis A total of 15 systematic reviews were included. The following supplements were examined: proteins, essential amino acids, leucine, β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate, creatine, and multinutrient supplementation (with or without physical exercise). Because of both the low amount and the low to moderate quality of the reviews, the level of evidence supporting most recommendations was low to moderate. Conclusions Best evidence is available to recommend leucine, because it has a significant effect on muscle mass in elderly people with sarcopenia. Protein supplementation on top of resistance training is recommended to increase muscle mass and strength, in particular for obese persons and for ≥ 24 weeks. Effects on sarcopenia as a construct were not reported in the included reviews.

scholarly journals Medication in AN: A Multidisciplinary Overview of Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corinne Blanchet ◽  
Sébastien Guillaume ◽  
Flora Bat-Pitault ◽  
Marie-Emilie Carles ◽  
Julia Clarke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anorexia Nervosa ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Psychiatric Symptoms ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Online Databases ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Nutritional Complications

Drugs are widely prescribed for anorexia nervosa in the nutritional, somatic, and psychiatric fields. There is no systematic overview in the literature, which simultaneously covers all these types of medication. The main aims of this paper are (1) to offer clinicians an overview of the evidence-based data in the literature concerning the medication (psychotropic drugs and medication for somatic and nutritional complications) in the field of anorexia nervosa since the 1960s, (2) to draw practical conclusions for everyday practise and future research. Searches were performed on three online databases, namely MEDLINE, Epistemonikos and Web of Science. Papers published between September 2011 and January 2019 were considered. Evidence-based data were identified from meta-analyses, if there were none, from systematic reviews, and otherwise from trials (randomized or if not open-label studies). Evidence-based results are scarce. No psychotropic medication has proved efficacious in terms of weight gain, and there is only weak data suggesting it can alleviate certain psychiatric symptoms. Concerning nutritional and somatic conditions, while there is no specific, approved medication, it seems essential not to neglect the interest of innovative therapeutic strategies to treat multi-organic comorbidities. In the final section we discuss how to use these medications in the overall approach to the treatment of anorexia nervosa.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document