scholarly journals Evaluation of literature searching and article selection skills of an evidence-based practice team

2020 ◽  
Vol 108 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Paige Jones ◽  
Emily A. Brennan ◽  
Amanda Davis
Keyword(s):  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Work Flow ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Literature Searching ◽  
Literature Searches ◽  
Hospital Policies

Background: An evidence-based practice (EBP) team at an academic medical center supports the development of evidence-based hospital policies and protocols via “Evidence Briefs.” An early career librarian was added to the EBP team to meet increased requests for Evidence Briefs, which provided an opportunity to initiate a quality improvement (QI) analysis, improve work flow, and cross-train staff on literature searching and article selection skills.Case Presentation: This QI project evaluated literature searching and article selection skills of an early career librarian (less than 2 years’ experience), a mid-career librarian (more than 10 years’ experience), and a critical appraisal expert. This project examined 10 Evidence Brief requests completed within a 6-month period. Analysis of each individual’s performance of literature searching and article selection was completed for each Evidence Brief. Across all Evidence Brief requests, the mid-career librarian performed the most comprehensive literature searches and captured the highest number of articles that ultimately ended up being included in the Evidence Briefs (75%). The critical appraisal expert performed best on the article selection portion of the project and identified the highest number of relevant articles that were included in Evidence Briefs (74%).Conclusions: This project provided a formalized method of assessing the literature searching and article selection skills of each member of the EBP team. This project illustrated the skill level of each individual and led to improvements in the Evidence Brief request work flow.

scholarly journals A Survey from a Large Academic Medical Center

2015 ◽  
Vol 06 (02) ◽  
pp. 305-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.M. Homan ◽  
J.J. Cimino ◽  
S.G. Peters ◽  
B.W. Pickering ◽  
V. Herasevich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Literature Searching ◽  
Knowledge Resources ◽  
Patient Interaction ◽  
Literature Searches ◽  
Academic Medical ◽  
Clinical Scenarios

Summary Objective: To better understand the literature searching preferences of clinical providers we conducted an institution-wide survey assessing the most preferred knowledge searching techniques. Materials and Methods: A survey regarding literature searching preferences was sent to 1862 unique clinical providers throughout Mayo Clinic. The survey consisted of 25 items asking respondents to select which clinical scenarios most often prompt literature searches as well as identify their most preferred knowledge resources. Results: A total of 450 completed surveys were returned and analyzed (24% response rate). 48% of respondents perform literature searches for more than half of their patient interactions with 91% of all searches occurring either before or within 3 hours of the patient interaction. When a search is performed 57% of respondents prefer synthesized information sources as compared to only 13% who prefer original research. 82% of knowledge searches are performed on a workstation or office computer while just 10% occur on a mobile device or at home. Conclusion: Providers in our survey demonstrate a need to answer clinical questions on a regular basis, especially in the diagnosis and therapy domains. Responses suggest that most of these searches occur using synthesized knowledge sources in the patient care setting within a very short time from the patient interaction. Citation: Ellsworth MA, Homan JM, Cimino JJ, Peters SG, Pickering BW, Herasevich V. Point-of-care knowledge-based resource needs of clinicians: A survey from a large academic medical center. Appl Clin Inf 2015; 6: 305–317http://dx.doi.org/10.4338/ACI-2014-11-RA-0104

Evidence Equals Excellence: The Application of an Evidence-Based Practice Model in an Academic Medical Center

2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Balakas ◽  
Patricia Potter ◽  
Elizabeth Pratt ◽  
Gail Rea ◽  
Jennifer Williams
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Practice Model ◽  
Academic Medical

Improving Labor Support for Patients in an Urban, Academic Medical Center: An Evidence-Based Practice Project

2012 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. S12
Author(s):  
Suzanne Margaret Alton ◽  
Jennifer L. MacHamer ◽  
Christine Kirk Shippen ◽  
Maria Nicole Mayzel ◽  
Deborah M. Grau
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Labor Support ◽  
Academic Medical

scholarly journals Critical appraisal and meta-analysis of biological variation studies on glycosylated albumin, glucose and HbA1c

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen Ricós ◽  
Pilar Fernández-Calle ◽  
Elisabet Gonzalez-Lao ◽  
Margarida Simón ◽  
Jorge Díaz-Garzón ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Healthy Subjects ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Biological Variation ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Literature Searches ◽  
Variation Data ◽  
Global Estimates ◽  
Systematic Literature Searches

AbstractObjectivesNumerous biological variation (BV) studies have been performed over the years, but the quality of these studies vary. The objectives of this study were to perform a systematic review and critical appraisal of BV studies on glycosylated albumin and to deliver updated BV estimates for glucose and HbA1c, including recently published high-quality studies such as the European Biological Variation study (EuBIVAS).MethodsSystematic literature searches were performed to identify BV studies. Nine publications not included in a previous review were identified; four for glycosylated albumin, three for glucose, and three for HbA1c. Relevant studies were appraised by the Biological Variation Data Critical Appraisal Checklist (BIVAC). Global BV estimates were derived by meta-analysis of BIVAC-compliant studies in healthy subjects with similar study design.ResultsOne study received BIVAC grade A, 2B, and 6C. In most cases, the C-grade was associated with deficiencies in statistical analysis. BV estimates for glycosylated albumin were: CVI=1.4% (1.2–2.1) and CVG=5.7% (4.7–10.6), whereas estimates for HbA1c, CVI=1.2% (0.3–2.5), CVG=5.4% (3.3–7.3), and glucose, CVI=5.0% (4.1–12.0), CVG=8.1% (2.7–10.8) did not differ from previously published global estimates.ConclusionsThe critical appraisal and rating of BV studies according to their methodological quality, followed by a meta-analysis, generate robust, and reliable BV estimates. This study delivers updated and evidence-based BV estimates for glycosylated albumin, glucose and HbA1c.

American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery/Foundation Reg-ent Registry: Purpose, Properties, and Priorities

2021 ◽  
pp. 019459982098413
Author(s):  
Cecelia E. Schmalbach ◽  
Jean Brereton ◽  
Cathlin Bowman ◽  
James C. Denneny
Keyword(s):  
American Academy ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Quality Care ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Neck Surgery ◽  
Performance Measure ◽  
Head And Neck Surgery ◽  
Evidence Based

Objective (1) To describe the patient and membership cohort captured by the otolaryngology-based specialty-specific Reg-ent registry. (2) To outline the capabilities of the Reg-ent registry, including the process by which members can access evidence-based data to address knowledge gaps identified by the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery/Foundation and ultimately define “quality” for our field of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery. Methods Data analytics was performed on Reg-ent (2015-2020) Results A total of 1629 participants from 239 practices were enrolled in Reg-ent, and 42 health care specialties were represented. Reg-ent encompassed 6,496,477 unique patients and 24,296,713 encounters/visits: the 45- to 64-year age group had the highest representation (n = 1,597,618, 28.1%); 3,867,835 (60.3%) patients identified as Caucasian; and “private” was the most common insurance (33%), followed by Blue Cross/Blue Shield (22%). Allergic rhinitis–unspecified and sensorineural hearing loss–bilateral were the top 2 diagnoses (9% each). Overall, 302 research gaps were identified from 17 clinical practice guidelines. Discussion Reg-ent benefits are vast—from monitoring one’s practice to defining otolaryngology–head and neck surgery quality, participating in advocacy, and conducting research. Reg-ent provides mechanisms for benchmarking, quality assessment, and performance measure development, with the objective of defining and guiding best practice in otolaryngology–head and neck surgery. To be successful, patient diversity must be achieved to include ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Increasing academic medical center membership will assist in achieving diversity so that the quality domain of equitable care is achieved. Implications for Practice Reg-ent provides the first ever registry that is specific to otolaryngology–head and neck surgery and compliant with HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) to collect patient outcomes and define evidence-based quality care.

Step 3: Critically Appraising Evidence

2021 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 402-405
Author(s):  
Susan Givens Bell
Keyword(s):  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Appraisal Process ◽  
Levels Of Evidence ◽  
The Third

Critical appraisal of the evidence is the third step in the evidence-based practice process. This column, the first in a multipart series to describe the critical appraisal process, defines and provides examples of the levels of evidence and tools to begin the appraisal process using a rapid critical appraisal technique.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document