scholarly journals L’intervention de type criminologique à l’aune de la Collaboration Cochrane

Criminologie ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denis Lafortune ◽  
Dominique Meilleur ◽  
Brigitte Blanchard
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Cochrane Database ◽  
Essais Randomisés

Résumé Dans les échelles d’appréciation de la qualité scientifique des recherches, les essais randomisés contrôlés (ERC) figurent en haut de la liste. En termes de crédibilité, dans le courant des pratiques fondées sur des données probantes (Evidence Based Practice [EBP]), les résultats qu’ils obtiennent ont la priorité sur les autres. Les recensions Cochrane, qui portent généralement sur l’efficacité d’interventions médicales, s’intéressent aussi aux interventions de type criminologique. À notre connaissance, aucune étude ne s’est encore penchée sur les conclusions dégagées par la Collaboration Cochrane sur ce type d’intervention. Dans le présent article, le contenu de la revue électronique Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews a été analysé, pour la période allant de 2000 à 2008. Les résultats montrent que 33 recensions Cochrane ont traité d’interventions de type criminologique. Privilégiant les ERC, ces recensions n’ont retenu en moyenne que 2 % de toutes les études publiées dans différents champs d’intervention. Un tel résultat permet de discuter de la pertinence de la méthode Cochrane pour évaluer l’efficacité d’interventions à caractère plus social. Les questions posées concernent la représentativité des milieux où sont implantées les interventions, la concomitance et la complexité des problèmes à résoudre, les apports et limites des « protocoles » d’intervention, ainsi que les risques de retard, voire de paralysie, dans l’implantation d’approches innovantes.

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 Systematic Review and its Relationship with Evidence-Based Practice in Health

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 824-831 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eugenia Urra Medina ◽  
René Mauricio Barría Pailaquilén
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Health Professions ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
The World

Systematic reviews (SR) have gained relevance in the world and Latin America because of their credibility in the search, compilation, arranging and analysis of the information obtained from research about health interventions, during a period of time. Consequently, evidence-based practice uses SR as a way to capture the best evidence of clinical effectiveness. This article reviews SR methodology, process, and its usefulness in health professions like nursing and medicine.

Using systematic reviews for evidence-based practice

AORN Journal ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-363
Author(s):  
Peggy Edwards ◽  
Allyson Lipp
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based

Evidence-Based I–O Psychology: Not There Yet

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob B. Briner ◽  
Denise M. Rousseau
Keyword(s):  
Social Policy ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Key Characteristics ◽  
The Future ◽  
Oriented Research

Evidence-based practice is now well established in several fields including medicine, nursing, and social policy. This article seeks to promote discussion of whether the practice of industrial–organizational (I–O) psychologists is evidence based and what is needed to make I–O psychology an evidence-based discipline. It first reviews the emergence of the concept of evidence-based practice. Second, it considers the definitions and features of evidence-based practice, including evidence-based management. It then assesses whether I–O psychology is itself an evidence-based discipline by identifying key characteristics of evidence-based practice and judging the extent these characterize I–O psychology. Fourth, some key strategies for promoting the use of evidence in I–O psychology are considered: practice-oriented research and systematic reviews. Fifth, barriers to practicing evidence-based I–O psychology are identified along with suggestions for overcoming them. Last is a look to the future of an evidence-based I–O psychology that plays an important role in helping consultants, in-house I–O psychologists, managers, and organizations become more evidence based.

Fad, Frenzy, or Future? A Review of the Institute of Medicine’s Report on the Direction of Evidence-Based Practice

2009 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-58
Author(s):  
Joan Renaud Smith ◽  
Ann Donze
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Dual Purpose ◽  
The Past

OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS, this column has had a dual purpose: presenting systematic reviews of neonatal clinical practice issues and providing readers with tools needed to utilize the evidencebased practice (EBP) process. We presented detailed examples of applying EBP to answer these reallife clinical practice problems:

Evidence-Based I–O Psychology: Not There Yet but Now a Little Nearer?

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob B. Briner ◽  
Denise M. Rousseau
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
First Category ◽  
Second Category

Our focal article sought to promote discussion of evidence-based approaches to practice in industrial–organizational (I–O) psychology. It did so by describing the meanings and origins of evidence-based practice, evaluating the extent to which I–O psychology practice is currently evidence-based, and considering the role of systematic reviews in promoting evidence-based practice. The commentaries on our focal article raised many interesting and important points. In our response, we divide them into two broad categories. The first category consists of comments and objections that arise from what we believe to be misinterpretations of evidence-based practice and our focal article. The second category contains those comments that in various ways extend and elaborate the issues raised in our focal article. Although we are not there yet, we hope that these commentaries will take us a little nearer to an evidence-based approach to I–O psychology.

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.

scholarly journals Promoting evidence-based practice: training health professionals for the evidence synthesis

2021 ◽  
Vol 55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniela Filipa Batista Cardoso ◽  
Diana Gabriela Simões Marques Santos ◽  
Joana Filipa Cunha Rodrigues ◽  
Nichole Bento ◽  
Rogério Manuel Clemente Rodrigues ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Training Program ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Centre Of Excellence ◽  
Satisfaction Evaluation ◽  
Students Satisfaction

ABSTRACT Objective: To report the experience of the Portugal Centre For Evidence Based Practice (PCEBP): a JBI Centre of Excellence in the training of health professionals, researchers, and professors in the Comprehensive Systematic Review Training Program, a course on Evidence Synthesis, specifically on Systematic Literature Reviews. Method: This article aims to report the experience of the Portugal Centre For Evidence Based Practice: a JBI Centre of Excellence in the implementation of the Comprehensive Systematic Review Training Program that trains health professionals, researchers, and teachers to develop Systematic Reviews, according to the JBI approach. Results: By the end of 2020, 11 editions of the course had been developed with 136 participants from different educational and health institutions, from different countries. As a result of the training of these participants, 13 systematic reviews were published in JBI Evidence Synthesis and 10 reviews were published in other journals. Conclusion: The reported results and the students’ satisfaction evaluation allow us to emphasize the relevance of the course for health professionals training on evidence synthesis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document