Putting Research Into Practice: Tutorials on Clinical Research, Implementation Science, and Evidence-Based Practice

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Research ◽  
Implementation Science ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Research Implementation

scholarly journals Confirmation bias by consumers of clinical research demonstrates the need for implementation science

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
James Peter Meza
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Implementation Science ◽  
Research Design ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Confirmation Bias ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Based Medicine

<p>The Journal's Editor holds that, although Evidence-based medicine typically only looks for bias of the research design, still evidence-based practice must also include the biases of those using the research evidence and how it is deployed in clinical practice.</p>

Implementation Science: Application of Evidence‐Based Practice Models to Improve Healthcare Quality

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-84
Author(s):  
Sharon Tucker ◽  
Molly McNett ◽  
Bernadette Mazurek Melnyk ◽  
Kirsten Hanrahan ◽  
Sarah C. Hunter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Implementation Science ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Healthcare Quality ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Practice Models ◽  
Science Application

Confidence Levels Can Broaden the Application of Clinical Research Findings and Promote Evidence-Based Practice

2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 99-104
Author(s):  
James E. Graham ◽  
Timothy A. Reistetter ◽  
Trudy R. Mallinson ◽  
Kenneth J. Ottenbacher
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Research ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Confidence Levels ◽  
Research Findings

scholarly journals Revisions to the Common Rule: A proposal in search of evidence

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 92-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart G Nicholls
Keyword(s):  
Implementation Science ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Common Rule ◽  
The Public ◽  
Regulatory Changes ◽  
The Common

Proposed changes to the Common Rule are proffered to save almost 7,000 reviews annually and consequently vast amounts of investigator and IRB-member time. However, the proposed changes have been subject to criticism. While some have lauded the changes as being imperfect, but nevertheless as improvements, others have contended that ‘neither the scientific community nor the public can be confident that improved practices will emerge from the regulatory changes mandated by the NPRM.’ In the present article, I discuss an important aspect that has been overlooked: the question of whether benefits will emerge is demonstrably empirical, yet data upon which to draw conclusions are conspicuous by their absence. This is thrown into sharp relief when we consider the current environment in which health research is increasingly focused on providing evidence of need or benefit, where there is greater emphasis on evidence-based practice, and when we have the nascent field of implementation science.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document