scholarly journals Thinking Inside the Box: Simple Methods to Evaluate Complex Treatments

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 45 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Michael Menke

We risk ignoring cheaper and safer medical treatments because they cannot be patented, lack profit potential, require too much patient-contact time, or do not have scientific results. Novel medical treatments may be difficult to evaluate for a variety of reasons such as patient selection bias, the effect of the package of care, or the lack of identifying the active elements of treatment. Whole Systems Research (WSR) is an approach designed to assess the performance of complete packages of clinical management. While the WSR method is compelling, there is no standard procedure for WSR, and its implementation may be intimidating. The truth is that WSR methodological tools are neither new nor complicated. There are two sequential steps, or boxes, that guide WSR methodology: establishing system predictability, followed by an audit of system element effectiveness. We describe the implementation of WSR with a particular attention to threats to validity (Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002; Shadish & Heinsman, 1997). DOI:10.2458/azu_jmmss_v2i1_menke

Author(s):  
João Porto de Albuquerque ◽  
Edouard J. Simon ◽  
Jan-Hendrik Wahoff ◽  
Arno Rolf

Research in the Information Systems (IS) field has been characterised by the use of a variety of methods and theoretical underpinnings. This fact recently raised concerns about the rigour of scientific results of IS research and about the legitimacy of the IS academic field. On the other hand, a number of IS researchers have argued for a view that values diversity as a strength of the IS field. This chapter supports this viewpoint and analyzes the relation between IS research and concepts originating from theoretical debates around transdisciplinarity. We present results from a group of researchers of various disciplinary backgrounds towards an integrative platform for the orientation of transdisciplinary IS research. The Mikropolis platform provides researchers with a common language, allowing the integration of different perspectives through exchange of experiences and mutual understanding. We also discuss some practical issues that arise from the transdisciplinary cooperation in IS research.


2005 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 206-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marja J. Verhoef ◽  
George Lewith ◽  
Cheryl Ritenbaugh ◽  
Heather Boon ◽  
Susan Fleishman ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (S1) ◽  
pp. S12-S16
Author(s):  
Charles Elder ◽  
Nadine Ijaz ◽  
John Weeks ◽  
Jennifer Rioux ◽  
Cheryl Ritenbaugh

2006 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 843-850 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Elder ◽  
Mikel Aickin ◽  
Iris R. Bell ◽  
Vinjar Fønnebø ◽  
George T. Lewith ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Ostermann ◽  
Andre-Michael Beer ◽  
Vassya Bankova ◽  
Andreas Michalsen

2020 ◽  
pp. 112067212097533
Author(s):  
Aman Chandra ◽  
Mario R Romano ◽  
Daniel SW Ting ◽  
Daniel L Chao

The COVID-19 pandemic has altered the clinical landscape immeasurably. The need to physical distance requires rethinking how we deliver ophthalmic care. Within healthcare, we will need to focus our resources on the five T’s: Utilising technology, multidisciplinary clinical teams with wide professional talents need to work efficiently to reduce patient contact time. With regular testing, this will allow us to reduce the risk further. We also must acknowledge the explosion of different modalities to train our future ophthalmologists and the global challenges and advantages that these bring. Finally, we must not forget the psychological impact that this pandemic will have on ophthalmologists and ancillary staff, and need to have robust mechanisms for support.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document