Health and Science Policy and Evidence-Based Medicine
Suggested Reading
Evidence-Based Guidelines - Suggested Reading
- Baumann MH, Gutterman D, Lewis SZ. ACCP evidence based guideline development: a successful and transparent approach addressing conflict of interest, funding, and patient-centered recommendations. Chest 2007; 132:1015-1024
- Guyatt G, Gutterman D, Baumann M, et al. Grading strength of recommendations and quality of evidence in clinical practice guidelines: a report from the American College of Chest Physicians task force. Chest 2006; 129:174-181
- Guyatt G, Baumann M, Pauker S, et al. Addressing resource allocation in recommendations from clinical practice guidelines: suggestions from the ACCP task force. Chest; 2006; 129:182-187
- Field MJ, Lohr KN, eds. Guidelines for clinical practice: from development to use. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1990
- Field MJ, Lohr KN, eds. Clinical practice guidelines: directions for a new program. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1990
- Grol R, Wensing M. What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. MJA 2004; 180:S57-S60
- Shojania JG, Grimshaw JM. Evidence-based quality improvement: the state of the science. Health Affairs. 2005; 24:138-150
- Straus SE, Richardson WS, Glasziou P, et al, eds. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 3rd ed. London, UK: Churchill-Livingston, 2005
Consensus Statements - Suggested Reading
- McMurray AR. Three decision-making aids: brainstorming, nominal group, and Delphi technique. J Nurs Staff Develop 1994; 10:62-65
- Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, et al. Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Pub Health 1984; 75:979-983
- Ashton CM, Kuykendall DH, Johnson ML, et al. A method of developing and weighting explicit process of care criteria for quality assessment. Medical Care 1994; 32:755-770
- Allen J, Dyos J, Jones M. Building consensus in healthcare: a guide to using the nominal group technique. Br J Community Nurs 2004; 9:110-114
- Baker J, Lovell K, Harris N. How expert are the experts? An exploration of the concept of ‘expert’ within Delphi panel techniques. Nurse Res 2006; 14:59-70
Systematic Reviews - Suggested Reading
- Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17:1-12
- Ioannidis JP, Lau J. Pooling research results: benefits and limitations of meta-analysis. Jt Comm J Qual Improv 1999; 25:462-469
- Egger M, Smith GD, Sterne JA. Uses and abuses of meta-analysis. Clin Med 2001 ;1:478-484
- Systematic reviews in health care: meta-analysis in context. 2nd ed. M Eggger, GD Smith, DG Altman, Eds. BMJ. 2001 London, UK
- Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analysis of randomized control trials: the QUOROM statement. Br J Surg 2002; 87:1448-1454
- Rosenfeld RM. Meta-analysis. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Rel Spec 2004; 66:186-195
Survey Techniques - Suggested Reading
- Fink A, Kosecoff J. How to conduct surveys: a step-by-step guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1996
- McColl E, Jacoby A, Thomas L, et al. Design and use of questionnaires: a review of best practice applicable to surveys of health service staff and patients. Health Technol Assess 2001; 5:1-256
- Boynton PM, Greenhalgh T. Selecting, designing and developing your questionnaire. BMJ 2004; 328:312-1315
- Mann KV. Not another survey! Using questionnaires effectively in needs assessment. J Cont Educ in the Health Prof 2005; 18:142-149
|
