Critical appraisal of diagnostic studies in nuclear medicine

2003 ◽  
Vol 42 (04) ◽  
pp. 129-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ch. Eilles ◽  
J. Marienhagen
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Medicine ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Diagnostic Studies ◽  
Information Bias ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
The Impact

Summary:The conceptual ideas of evidence based critical appraisal of diagnostic studies are described in this survey. In this context special attention is given to biases in study design such as verification- as well as information-bias limiting the validity of diagnostic studies. The practice of critical appraisal is demonstrated in an application to an example of a nuclear medicine scenario. The impact of evidence based medicine on nuclear medicine as a diagnostic discipline is discussed in detail.

scholarly journals Cognitive levels in testing knowledge in evidence-based medicine: a cross sectional study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Buljan ◽  
Matko Marušić ◽  
Ružica Tokalić ◽  
Marin Viđak ◽  
Tina Poklepović Peričić ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Study Design ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
First Year ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Educational Objectives ◽  
Knowledge Test ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Diagnostic Studies ◽  
Cognitive Levels ◽  
Based Medicine

Abstract Background Knowledge assessment in evidence-based medicine (EBM) is usually performed by the measurement of memorised facts, understanding of EBM concepts and application of learned knowledge in familiar situations, all of which are considered lower-level educational objectives. The aim of this study was to assess EBM knowledge both on higher and lower cognitive levels across EBM topics. Methods In order to assess knowledge on different EBM topics across learning levels, we created a knowledge test (Six Progressive Levels in Testing – SPLIT instrument), which consists of 36 multiple choice items and measures knowledge in EBM at six cognitive levels (Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analysing, Evaluating and Creating) and addresses six EBM topics (Evidence-based practice, Internal validity, Clinical importance, Study design, Sources of evidence, Diagnostic studies). Three independent assessors defined the minimum passing score (MPS) for the overall test, based on the first-year course content and educational objectives. The instrument was assessed in a sample of first- (n = 119) and third-year medical students (n = 70) and EBM experts (n = 14). Results The MPS was 16 correct answers out of total 36 questions, and was achieved by 21 out of 119 first-year students, 14 out of 70 third-year students and 9 out of 14 EBM experts (χ2 = 13.3; P < 0.001, with significantly higher proportion of experts passing compared to students). Although experts had the highest scores overall, none of the groups outperformed others on individual cognitive levels, but the experts outperformed students in EBM topics of Study design and Sources of evidence (P = 0.002 and 0.004, respectively, Kruskal-Wallis test). First- and third-year students performed better on specific course topics taught in that study year (Diagnostic studies and Clinical relevance, respectively). Conclusion EBM knowledge of students and experts differ according to the specificities of their education/expertise, but neither group had excellent knowledge in all areas. It may be difficult to develop a knowledge test that includes different EBM topics at different cognitive levels to follow the development of specific and general aspects of EBM knowledge.

Assessing the FACTTS: An Evidence-Based Medicine and Critical Appraisal Course for Medical Students

2013 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. W. Cyrus ◽  
David C. Duggar ◽  
Deidra Woodson ◽  
Donna F. Timm ◽  
Jerry W. McLarty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Based Medicine

Evidence-Based Medicine

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily R. Winslow
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Reporting Guidelines ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Treatment Benefits ◽  
Therapeutic Decisions ◽  
History Of ◽  
Evidence Based Surgery ◽  
Key Resources ◽  
Based Medicine

Descriptions of “evidence-based” approaches to medical care are now ubiquitous in both the popular press and medical journals. The term evidence-based medicine (EBM) was first coined in 1992, and over the last two decades, the field has experienced rapid growth, and its principles now permeate both graduate medical education and clinical practice. The field of EBM has been in constant evolution since its introduction and continues to undergo refinements as its principles are tested and applied in a wide variety of clinical circumstances. This review presents a brief history of EBM, EBM: fundamental tenets, a critical appraisal of a single study, reporting guidelines for single studies, a critical appraisal of a body of evidence, evidence-based surgery, and limitations in EBM. Tables list strength of evidence for treatment decisions (EBM working group), Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine revised levels of evidence for treatment benefits , “4S” approach to finding resources for EBM, critical appraisal of individual studies examining therapeutic decisions, reporting guidelines by study design, and key resources for evidence-based surgery. This review contains 6 tables and 85 references

An overview of study designs

2020 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Julian Aquilina ◽  
Joana B Neves ◽  
Maxine GB Tran
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Valid Evidence ◽  
Study Designs ◽  
Based Medicine

The numbers of clinical trials have increased exponentially over the last decade, amplifying the pressure to select an appropriate study design to obtain reliable and valid evidence. The ability to find, critically appraise and use evidence to develop new interventions is fundamental to evidence-based medicine. Different study designs have their own advantages and disadvantages, and provide different evidentiary value. This article provides an overview of clinical trials, illustrating that, ultimately, the study design chosen needs to meet experimental and funding limitations, while minimising error.

25. WHAT'S THE EVIDENCE? EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF A RESIDENT EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE CURRICULUM

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (7) ◽  
pp. e13-e14
Author(s):  
Minnie Dasgupta ◽  
Danielle Kirkey ◽  
Jake Weatherly ◽  
Kevin Kuo ◽  
Carrie Rassbach
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
The Impact

Assessment of the Impact of Clinical Pharmacology Consultations Provided to Hospital Clinicians From the Drug Information Center—An Outcome Research in a Developing Country

2019 ◽  
pp. 089719001988525
Author(s):  
CVN Harish ◽  
Devaraj Belavigi ◽  
Amol N. Patil ◽  
Smita Pattanaik ◽  
Ashish Kakkar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Drug Information ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Fisher Exact Test ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Information Center ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
The Impact

Background: Drug Information Center (DIC) with on-call evidence-based medicine service can revolutionize health-care practice and also can play a major role in health-care delivery in both developed and developing countries. Objective: To assess the feedback received from hospital clinicians for the newly initiated DIC services in a tertiary care hospital of North India. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study conducted between January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. The clinicians approached DIC for specific pharmacotherapeutic questions for managing an index patient. After providing consultation, DIC followed up with them for the action taken and feedback on the consultation. The results of the data analyzed using Fisher Exact test and descriptive statistics. Results: Of 264 encounters, more than 98% of clinicians found the service satisfactory. There was a statistically significant association between the timely answer provided to treating physicians and their level of satisfaction with the service ( P < .05). There was no significant association between academic experiences and the satisfaction or dissatisfaction among the clinical fraternity colleagues. The interpretation ability of on-call pharmacology postgraduate students was a significantly associated factor with clinician’s satisfaction level ( P < .05). More than 96% of clinicians followed the pharmacotherapy advice recommended by DIC in their patient management. Conclusion: Thorough evaluation of published research needs to be taught to budding pharmacologists, pharmacists in their curriculum for an effective DIC service. DIC service has the potential to minimize the barrier of evidence-based medicine practice in developing as well as developed countries.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document