Knowledge for knowledge translation: the role of the Cochrane Collaboration

Use of standardized terminologies in clinical practice: A scoping review

AIM

To explore the use and impact of standardized terminologies (STs) within nursing and midwifery practice.

INTRODUCTION

The standardization of clinical documentation creates a potential to optimize patient care and safety. Nurses and midwives, who represent the largest proportion of the healthcare workforce worldwide, have been using nursing-specific and multidisciplinary STs within electronic health records (EHRs) for decades. However, little is known regarding ST use and impact within clinical practice.

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature was conducted (2019) across PubMed, CINAHL, Embase and CENTRAL in collaboration with the Five Country Nursing and Midwifery Digital Leadership Group (DLG). Identified studies (n = 3547) were reviewed against a number of agreed criterion, and data were extracted from included studies. Studies were categorized and findings were reviewed by the DLG.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty three studies met the inclusion criteria. These were conducted across 25 different countries and in various healthcare settings, utilising mainly nursing-specific (most commonly NANDA-I, NIC, NOC and the Omaha System) and less frequently local, multidisciplinary or medical STs (e.g., ICD). Within the studies, STs were evaluated in terms of Measurement properties, Usability, Documentation quality, Patient care, Knowledge generation, and Education (pre and post registration). As well as the ST content, the impact of the ST on practice depended on the healthcare setting, patient cohort, nursing experience, provision of education and support in using the ST, and usability of EHRs.

CONCLUSION

Employment of STs in clinical practice has the capability to improve communication, quality of care and interoperability, as well as facilitate value-based healthcare and knowledge generation. However, employment of several different STs and study heterogeneity renders it difficult to aggregate and generalize findings.

Successfully implementing a national electronic health record: a rapid umbrella review

AIM

To summarize the findings from literature reviews with a view to identifying and exploring the key factors which impact on the success of an EHR implementation across different healthcare contexts.

INTRODUCTION

Despite the widely recognised benefits of electronic health records (EHRs), their full potential has not always been achieved, often as a consequence of the implementation process. As more countries launch national EHR programmes, it is critical that the most up-to-date and relevant international learnings are shared with key stakeholders.

METHODS

A rapid umbrella review was undertaken in collaboration with a multidisciplinary panel of knowledge-users and experts from Ireland. A comprehensive literature review was completed (2019) across several search engines (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, ProQuest, Cochrane) and Gray literature. Identified studies (n = 5,040) were subject to eligibility criterion and identified barriers and facilitators were analysed, reviewed, discussed and interpreted by the expert panel.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven literature reviews were identified which captured the key organizational, human and technological factors for a successful EHR implementation according to various stakeholders across different settings. Although the size, type and culture of the healthcare setting impacted on the organizational factors, each was deemed important for EHR success; Governance, leadership and culture, End-user involvement, Training, Support, Resourcing, and Workflows. As well as organizational differences, individual end-users have varying Skills and characteristics, Perceived benefits and incentives, and Perceived changes to the health ecosystem which were also critical to success. Finally, the success of the EHR technology depended on Usability, Interoperability, Adaptability, Infrastructure, Regulation, standards and policies, and Testing.

CONCLUSION

Fifteen inter-linked organizational, human and technological factors emerged as important for successful EHR implementations across primary, secondary and long-term care settings. In determining how to employ these factors, the local context, individual end-users and advancing technology must also be considered.

The use of evidence in decision making by hospital managers in Lebanon: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Knowledge synthesis products have emerged as support agents for decision making in clinical practice and policy. However, their use for evidence-informed decision making remains limited in health care management especially in low- and middle-income countries. This study assesses the use of evidence by middle and senior managers in Lebanese hospitals.

METHODS

This multihospital cross-sectional study used a self-administered web survey of middle and senior managers. Hospitals were purposively selected, and data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Hospital participation rate was 25%, while adjusted managers' response rate was 44.8%. Prevalence of using evidence was 70%, while prevalence of evidence-seeking behavior was 90%. Evidence was mainly used in design of policies, protocols, and procedures; nursing issues; or procurement decisions. Facilitators for evidence-informed decision making included upper management support and organizational culture, whereas limited resources such as funding, time, and training hindered use of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate that utilization of evidence was comparable with that of high-income countries. Training and continuous education were crucial for advancing evidence-informed decision making among hospital managers. However, neither the quality nor the sources of evidence used for decision making were assessed in this study. Future studies should assess the quality and sources of evidence utilized in decision making.

Desenvolvimento de um guia rápido para prática de atenção à saúde da população transgênero

Problema: Os direitos fundamentais das pessoas transgênero são negados cotidianamente. Neste cenário, o preconceito age como determinante social de saúde impactando na prevalência de problemas como saúde mental e infecções sexualmente transmissíveis (ISTs). O objetivo foi o desenvolvimento de um sumário de evidências para apoiar o atendimento clínico e embasar a capacitação dos profissionais da Atenção Primária de Saúde de Florianópolis - SC, a fim de melhorar os resultados de saúde dessa população. Métodos: Baseado na ferramenta PACK – interface acessível e intuitiva no modelo pergunte, solicite, aconselhe e trate – já implementada no município de Florianópolis. O método de revisão rápida foi utilizado para busca de evidência, priorizando sumários de prática clínica e protocolos internacionais. Fontes primárias foram utilizadas quando os dados anteriores eram insuficientes ou conflitantes. As perguntas de pesquisa seguiram o acrônimo PICO e a recomendação foi classificada de acordo com a adaptação GRADE do Center of Excellence for Transegender Health. Resultados: Foi criado o Guia Rápido para Prática de Atenção à Saúde da População Transgênero aos moldes do PACK Brasil. O mesmo aguarda aprovação do PACK Brasil e do Ambulatório de Atenção Integral à População Transexual de Florianópolis para futura incorporação do material. Conclusão: Apesar da falta de evidência de qualidade e estudos voltados para a população específica, a existência de diretrizes nesse campo legitima a necessidade de atenção à saúde transgênero, além de auxiliar profissionais de saúde e formuladores de políticas sobre como atender a essas necessidades. Na perspectiva de redução de danos, devemos transpor a barreira do estigma social e institucional para produção de diretrizes consensuais em busca de equidade para população transgênero.

Pharmacological interventions for prevention and management of delirium in intensive care patients: a systematic overview of reviews and meta-analyses

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the evidence from reviews and meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials on the effects of pharmacological prevention and management of delirium in intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

METHODS

We searched for reviews in July 2017 in: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, BIOSIS Previews, CINAHL and LILACS. We assessed whether reviews were systematic according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and assessed the methodological quality using ROBIS.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes: all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, prevention of delirium and management of delirium.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

quality of life; non-serious adverse events and cognitive function.

RESULTS

We included 378 reviews: 369 narrative reviews, eight semisystematic reviews which failed on a maximum of two arbitrary PRISMA criteria and one systematic review fulfilling all 27 PRISMA criteria. For the prevention of delirium, we identified the one systematic review and eight semisystematic reviews all assessing the effects of alpha-2-agonists. None found evidence of a reduction of mortality (systematic review RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.24). The systematic review and three semisystematic reviews found no evidence of an effect for the prevention of delirium (systematic review RR 0.85, 0.63 to 1.14). Conversely, four semisystematic reviews found a beneficial effect. Serious adverse events, quality of life, non-serious adverse events and cognitive function were not assessed. We did not identify any systematic or semisystematic reviews addressing other pharmacological interventions for the prevention of delirium. For the management of manifest delirium, we did not identify any systematic or semisystematic review assessing any pharmacological agents.

CONCLUSION

Based on systematic reviews, the evidence for the use of pharmacological interventions for prevention or management of delirium is poor or sparse. A systematic review with low risk of bias assessing the effects of pharmacological prevention of delirium and management of manifest delirium in ICU patients is urgently needed.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016046628.

Developing a valid and reliable assessment of knowledge translation (KT) for continuing professional development program of health professionals

Introduction

Knowledge Translation (KT) is expected to be a critical learning outcome of a Continuing Professional Development (CPD) program. It continues to serve as an area of interest among educators and healthcare providers due to its importance to evidence-based practice. This study endeavored to develop a valid and reliable KT learning assessment tool in CPD.

Methods

The Inventory of Reflective Vignettes (IRV), an innovative approach of integrating research vignettes, was utilized in crafting the 20-item IRV-KT tool. This instrument includes knowledge creation and action as essential KT constructs. KT competency was assessed in three segments (i.e., before and after CPD event and if in a lecture) using a one-group post-posttest pre-experimental design. Health professionals who successfully completed a CPD program on a knowledge translation topic were asked to complete the IRV-KT during the pilot study (n = 10) and actual implementation (n = 45). Responses were subjected to Cronbach’s reliability and criterion-validity testing.

Results

The initial test of the IRV-KT tool demonstrated a high internal reliability (α = 0.97) and most items yielded acceptable validity scores. During the actual implementation, a higher reliability score of 0.98 was generated with significant correlations between the before-after segments for both KT constructs of creation (r = 0.33, p < 0.05) and action (r = 0.49, p < 0.05). All items have significant positive validity coefficients (r > 0.35, p < 0.05) in all segments of the tool.

Discussion

The study produced a reflective assessment tool to validly and reliably assess KT learning in a CPD. IRV-KT is seen to guide the curriculum process of CPD programs to bridge learning and healthcare outcomes.

Technical Packages in Injury and Violence Prevention to Move Evidence Into Practice: Systematic Reviews and Beyond

Injury and violence prevention strategies have greater potential for impact when they are based on scientific evidence. Systematic reviews of the scientific evidence can contribute key information about which policies and programs might have the greatest impact when implemented. However, systematic reviews have limitations, such as lack of implementation guidance and contextual information, that can limit the application of knowledge. "Technical packages," developed by knowledge brokers such as the federal government, nonprofit agencies, and academic institutions, have the potential to be an efficient mechanism for making information from systematic reviews actionable. Technical packages provide information about specific evidence-based prevention strategies, along with the estimated costs and impacts, and include accompanying implementation and evaluation guidance to facilitate adoption, implementation, and performance measurement. We describe how systematic reviews can inform the development of technical packages for practitioners, provide examples of technical packages in injury and violence prevention, and explain how enhancing review methods and reporting could facilitate the use and applicability of scientific evidence.

Mind the gap in clinical trials: A participatory action analysis with citizen collaborators

What are the strengths, gaps, expectations, and barriers to research engagement in clinical trials as communicated through social media? Clinical trials test treatments to provide reliable information for safety and effectiveness. Trials are building blocks in which what is learned in earlier research can be used to improve treatments, compare alternatives, and improve quality of life. For 20 years, the percentages of clinical trials volunteers have decreased whereas the costs of running clinical trials have multiplied. Participants enroll in trials to access latest treatments, to help others, and to advance science, but there is growing unrest. The priorities of those running the trials differ from those of the participants, and the roles for public research involvement lack clarity. Changes to bridge these gaps in the research culture are proposed through the use of participatory action research (PAR) in which stakeholders collaborate to improve research methodology, galvanize citizen participation, multiply health knowledge, problem-solve barriers to access, and explore the value of research volunteers as collaborators. PAR enabled the inclusion of citizens as full collaborators. Social media data were gathered for 120 days until saturation was reached. De-identified data were organized into a Strengths Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats framework and coded into themes for analysis. After the analysis, the authors prioritized potential solutions for improving research engagement. Strengths and opportunities remained constant through trial phases, disease burdens, and interventions. Threats included alienation, litigation, disparity, and shaming. Poor management and barriers to inclusion were identified as weaknesses. Opportunities included improving resource management and information quality. Barriers were minimized when relationships between staff and participants were inclusive, respectful, tolerant, and open to change. Participants' communications ranged from fulfillment through trial involvement to disparities and rights violations. PAR provides a safe space without power imbalances in which researchers and citizen worked as equals rather than as researchers and objects of research.

What Synthesis Methodology Should I Use? A Review and Analysis of Approaches to Research Synthesis

BACKGROUND

When we began this process, we were doctoral students and a faculty member in a research methods course. As students, we were facing a review of the literature for our dissertations. We encountered several different ways of conducting a review but were unable to locate any resources that synthesized all of the various synthesis methodologies. Our purpose is to present a comprehensive overview and assessment of the main approaches to research synthesis. We use 'research synthesis' as a broad overarching term to describe various approaches to combining, integrating, and synthesizing research findings.

METHODS

We conducted an integrative review of the literature to explore the historical, contextual, and evolving nature of research synthesis. We searched five databases, reviewed websites of key organizations, hand-searched several journals, and examined relevant texts from the reference lists of the documents we had already obtained.

RESULTS

We identified four broad categories of research synthesis methodology including conventional, quantitative, qualitative, and emerging syntheses. Each of the broad categories was compared to the others on the following: key characteristics, purpose, method, product, context, underlying assumptions, unit of analysis, strengths and limitations, and when to use each approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The current state of research synthesis reflects significant advancements in emerging synthesis studies that integrate diverse data types and sources. New approaches to research synthesis provide a much broader range of review alternatives available to health and social science students and researchers.

Using social media for knowledge translation, promotion of evidence-based medicine and high-quality information on health

Knowledge translation activities may be targeted towards all participants in healthcare practices, including patients, consumers, and policy makers. Hereby, use of social media, namely social network Facebook, as a tool for knowledge translation, promotion of evidence-based medicine and high-quality information on health is described. In March 2013, a Facebook page of the Croatian Cochrane Branch was created and its main content are translated plain language summaries (PLS) of the systematic reviews produced by The Cochrane Collaboration. Since the page was created it has gained 1441 followers, mostly from Croatia and neighboring countries with similar language. Most of the page followers are women aged 25 to 44 and the most popular content is related to pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding. Page followers are lay persons, health professionals and journalists, who further disseminate the page content. In summary, social media enables multiple possibilities to engage with target audience and to disseminate the evidence-based medicine content. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Barriers and facilitators to uptake of systematic reviews by policy makers and health care managers: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

We completed a scoping review on the barriers and facilitators to use of systematic reviews by health care managers and policy makers, including consideration of format and content, to develop recommendations for systematic review authors and to inform research efforts to develop and test formats for systematic reviews that may optimise their uptake.

METHODS

We used the Arksey and O'Malley approach for our scoping review. Electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo) were searched from inception until September 2014. Any study that identified barriers or facilitators (including format and content features) to uptake of systematic reviews by health care managers and policy makers/analysts was eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened the literature results and abstracted data from the relevant studies. The identified barriers and facilitators were charted using a barriers and facilitators taxonomy for implementing clinical practice guidelines by clinicians.

RESULTS

We identified useful information for authors of systematic reviews to inform their preparation of reviews including providing one-page summaries with key messages, tailored to the relevant audience. Moreover, partnerships between researchers and policy makers/managers to facilitate the conduct and use of systematic reviews should be considered to enhance relevance of reviews and thereby influence uptake.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic review authors can consider our results when publishing their systematic reviews. These strategies should be rigorously evaluated to determine impact on use of reviews in decision-making.

Validity and usability of a professional association's web-based knowledge translation portal: American Physical Therapy Association's PTNow.org

Background

PTNow.org is an evidence-based, on-line portal created by a professional membership association to promote use of evidence in practice and to help decrease unwarranted variation in practice. The site contains synthesis documents designed to promote efficient clinical reasoning. These documents were written and peer-reviewed by teams of content experts and master clinicians. The purpose of this paper is to report on the content and construct validity as well as usability of the site.

Methods

Physical therapist participants used clinical summaries (available in 3 formats--as a full summary with hyperlinks, “quick takes” with hyperlinks, and a portable two-page version) on the PTNow.org site to answer knowledge acquisition and clinical reasoning questions related to four patient scenarios. They also responded to questions about ease of use related to website navigation and about format and completeness of information using a 1–5 Likert scale. Responses were coded to reflect how participants used the site and then were summarized descriptively. Preferences for clinical summary format were analyzed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) and a Dunnett T3 post hoc analysis.

Results

Seventeen participants completed the study. Clinical relevance and completeness ratings by experienced clinicians, which were used as the measure of content validity, ranged from 3.1 to 4.6 on a 5 point scale. Construct validity based on the information on the PTNow.org site was supported for knowledge acquisition questions 66 % of the time and for clinical reasoning questions 40 % of the time. Usability ratings for the full clinical summary were 4.6 (1.2); for the quick takes, 3.5 (.98); and for the portable clinical summary, 4.0 (.45). Participants preferred the full clinical summary over the other two formats (F = 5.908, P = 0.007). One hundred percent of the participants stated that they would recommend the PTNow site to their colleagues.

Conclusion

Prelimary evidence supported both content validity and construct validity of knowledge acquisition, and partially supported construct validity of clinical reasoning for the clinical summaries on the PTNow.org site. Usability was supported, with users preferring the full clinical summary over the other two formats. Iterative design is ongoing.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12911-015-0178-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Meta-analysis as Statistical and Analytical Method of Journal's Content Scientific Evaluation

INTRODUCTION

A meta-analysis is a statistical and analytical method which combines and synthesizes different independent studies and integrates their results into one common result.

GOAL

Analysis of the journals "Medical Archives", "Materia Socio Medica" and "Acta Informatica Medica", which are located in the most eminent indexed databases of the biomedical milieu.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study has retrospective and descriptive character, and included the period of the calendar year 2014. Study included six editions of all three journals (total of 18 journals).

RESULTS

In this period was published a total of 291 articles (in the "Medical Archives" 110, "Materia Socio Medica" 97, and in "Acta Informatica Medica" 84). The largest number of articles was original articles. Small numbers have been published as professional, review articles and case reports. Clinical events were most common in the first two journals, while in the journal "Acta Informatica Medica" belonged to the field of medical informatics, as part of pre-clinical medical disciplines. Articles are usually required period of fifty to fifty nine days for review. Articles were received from four continents, mostly from Europe. The authors are most often from the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, then Iran, Kosovo and Macedonia.

CONCLUSION

The number of articles published each year is increasing, with greater participation of authors from different continents and abroad. Clinical medical disciplines are the most common, with the broader spectrum of topics and with a growing number of original articles. Greater support of the wider scientific community is needed for further development of all three of the aforementioned journals.

Feasibility of a rapid response mechanism to meet policymakers' urgent needs for research evidence about health systems in a low income country: a case study

OBJECTIVES

Despite the recognition of the importance of evidence-informed health policy and practice, there are still barriers to translating research findings into policy and practice. The present study aimed to establish the feasibility of a rapid response mechanism, a knowledge translation strategy designed to meet policymakers' urgent needs for evidence about health systems in a low income country, Uganda. Rapid response mechanisms aim to address the barriers of timeliness and relevance of evidence at the time it is needed.

METHODS

A rapid response mechanism (service) designed a priori was offered to policymakers in the health sector in Uganda. In the form of a case study, data were collected about the profile of users of the service, the kinds of requests for evidence, changes in answers, and courses of action influenced by the mechanism and their satisfaction with responses and the mechanism in general.

RESULTS

We found that in the first 28 months, the service received 65 requests for evidence from 30 policymakers and stakeholders, the majority of whom were from the Ministry of Health. The most common requests for evidence were about governance and organization of health systems. It was noted that regular contact between the policymakers and the researchers at the response service was an important factor in response to, and uptake of the service. The service seemed to increase confidence for policymakers involved in the policymaking process.

CONCLUSION

Rapid response mechanisms designed to meet policymakers' urgent needs for research evidence about health systems are feasible and acceptable to policymakers in low income countries.

Association between foot type and lower extremity injuries: systematic literature review with meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic literature review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the association between nonneutral foot types (high arch and flatfoot) and lower extremity and low back injuries, and to identify the most appropriate methods to use for foot classification.

METHODS

A search of 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses), Google Scholar, and the reference lists of included studies was conducted to identify relevant articles. The review included comparative cross-sectional, case-control, and prospective studies that reported qualitative/quantitative associations between foot types and lower extremity and back injuries. Quality of the selected studies was evaluated, and data synthesis for the level of association between foot types and injuries was conducted. A random-effects model was used to pool odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) results for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included for meta-analysis. A significant association between nonneutral foot types and lower extremity injuries was determined (OR = 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11, 1.37; P<.001). Foot posture index (OR = 2.58; 95% CI: 1.33, 5.02; P<.01) and visual/physical examination (OR = 1.17; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.28; P<.01) were 2 assessment methods using distinct foot-type categories that showed a significant association with lower extremity injuries. For foot-assessment methods using a continuous scale, measurements of lateral calcaneal pitch angle (SMD, 1.92; 95% CI: 1.44, 2.39; P<.00001), lateral talocalcaneal angle (SMD, 1.36; 95% CI: 0.93, 1.80; P<.00001), and navicular height (SMD, 0.34; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.52; P<.001) showed significant effect sizes in identifying high-arch foot, whereas the navicular drop test (SMD, 0.45; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.87; P<.05) and relaxed calcaneal stance position (SMD, 0.49; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.97; P<.05) displayed significant effect sizes in identifying flatfoot. Subgroup analyses revealed no significant associations for children with flatfoot, cross-sectional studies, or prospective studies on high arch.

CONCLUSIONS

High-arch and flatfoot foot types are associated with lower extremity injuries, but the strength of this relationship is low. Although the foot posture index and visual/physical examination showed significance, they are qualitative measures. Radiographic and navicular height measurements can delineate high-arch foot effectively, with only anthropometric measures accurately classifying flatfoot.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognosis, level 2a.

Balancing exploration and exploitation in transferring research into practice: a comparison of five knowledge translation entity archetypes

BACKGROUND

Translating knowledge from research into clinical practice has emerged as a practice of increasing importance. This has led to the creation of new organizational entities designed to bridge knowledge between research and practice. Within the UK, the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) have been introduced to ensure that emphasis is placed in ensuring research is more effectively translated and implemented in clinical practice. Knowledge translation (KT) can be accomplished in various ways and is affected by the structures, activities, and coordination practices of organizations. We draw on concepts in the innovation literature--namely exploration, exploitation, and ambidexterity--to examine these structures and activities as well as the ensuing tensions between research and implementation.

METHODS

Using a qualitative research approach, the study was based on 106 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with the directors, theme leads and managers, key professionals involved in research and implementation in nine CLAHRCs. Data was also collected from intensive focus group workshops.

RESULTS

In this article we develop five archetypes for organizing KT. The results show how the various CLAHRC entities work through partnerships to create explorative research and deliver exploitative implementation. The different archetypes highlight a range of structures that can achieve ambidextrous balance as they organize activity and coordinate practice on a continuum of exploration and exploitation.

CONCLUSION

This work suggests that KT entities aim to reach their goals through a balance between exploration and exploitation in the support of generating new research and ensuring knowledge implementation. We highlight different organizational archetypes that support various ways to maintain ambidexterity, where both exploration and exploitation are supported in an attempt to narrow the knowledge gaps. The KT entity archetypes offer insights on strategies in structuring collaboration to facilitate an effective balance of exploration and exploitation learning in the KT process.

Consensus-based recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Critics of systematic reviews have argued that these studies often fail to inform clinical decision making because their results are far too general, that the data are sparse, such that findings cannot be applied to individual patients or for other decision making. While there is some consensus on methods for investigating statistical and methodological heterogeneity, little attention has been paid to clinical aspects of heterogeneity. Clinical heterogeneity, true effect heterogeneity, can be defined as variability among studies in the participants, the types or timing of outcome measurements, and the intervention characteristics. The objective of this project was to develop recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews.

METHODS

We used a modified Delphi technique with three phases: (1) pre-meeting item generation; (2) face-to-face consensus meeting in the form of a modified Delphi process; and (3) post-meeting feedback. We identified and invited potential participants with expertise in systematic review methodology, systematic review reporting, or statistical aspects of meta-analyses, or those who published papers on clinical heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Between April and June of 2011, we conducted phone calls with participants. In June 2011 we held the face-to-face focus group meeting in Ann Arbor, Michigan. First, we agreed upon a definition of clinical heterogeneity: Variations in the treatment effect that are due to differences in clinically related characteristics. Next, we discussed and generated recommendations in the following 12 categories related to investigating clinical heterogeneity: the systematic review team, planning investigations, rationale for choice of variables, types of clinical variables, the role of statistical heterogeneity, the use of plotting and visual aids, dealing with outlier studies, the number of investigations or variables, the role of the best evidence synthesis, types of statistical methods, the interpretation of findings, and reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical heterogeneity is common in systematic reviews. Our recommendations can help guide systematic reviewers in conducting valid and reliable investigations of clinical heterogeneity. Findings of these investigations may allow for increased applicability of findings of systematic reviews to the management of individual patients.

Making evidence more wanted: a systematic review of facilitators to enhance the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses

CONTEXT

The increased uptake of evidence from systematic reviews is advocated because of their potential to improve the quality of decision making for patient care. Systematic reviews can do this by decreasing inappropriate clinical variation and quickly expediting the application of current, effective advances to everyday practice. However, research suggests that evidence from systematic reviews has not been widely adopted by health professionals. Little is known about the facilitators to uptake of research evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVE

To review the facilitators to the uptake by decision makers, of evidence from systematic, meta-analyses and the databases containing them.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched 19 databases covering the full range of publication years, utilised three search engines and also personally contacted investigators. Grey literature and knowledge translation research was particularly sought. Reference lists of primary studies and related reviews were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were included if they reported on the views and perceptions of decision makers on the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews, meta-analyses and the databases associated with them. One investigator screened titles to identify candidate articles, and then two reviewers independently assessed the relevance of retrieved articles to exclude studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria. Quality of the included studies was also assessed.

DATA EXTRACTION

Using a pre-established taxonomy, two reviewers described the methods of included studies and extracted data that were summarised in tables and then analysed. Differences were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS

Of articles initially identified, we selected unique published studies describing at least one facilitator to the uptake of evidence from systematic reviews. The 15 unique studies reported 10 surveys, three qualitative investigations and two mixed studies that addressed potential facilitators. Five studies were from Canada, four from the UK, three from Australia, one from Iran and one from South-east Asia (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines), with one study covering both Canada and UK. In total, the 15 studies covered eight countries from four continents. Of 2495 participants in the 15 studies, at least 1343 (53.8%) were physicians. Perceived facilitators to the use of evidence from systematic reviews varied. The 15 studies yielded 54 potential facilitators to systematic review uptake. The five most commonly reported perceived facilitators to uptake of evidence from systematic reviews were the following: the perception that systematic reviews have multiple uses for improving knowledge, research, clinical protocols and evidence-based medicine skills (6/15); a content that included benefits, harms and costs and is current, transparent and timely (6/15); a format with a 1:3:25 staged access and executive summary (5/15); training in use (4/15); and peer-group support (4/15).

CONCLUSION

The results expand our understanding of how multiple factors act as facilitators to optimal clinical practice. This systematic review reveals that interventions to foster uptake of evidence from systematic reviews, meta-analyses and The Cochrane Library can build on a broad range of facilitators.

Investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews: a methodologic review of guidance in the literature

BACKGROUND

While there is some consensus on methods for investigating statistical and methodological heterogeneity, little attention has been paid to clinical aspects of heterogeneity. The objective of this study is to summarize and collate suggested methods for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews.

METHODS

We searched databases (Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and CONSORT, to December 2010) and reference lists and contacted experts to identify resources providing suggestions for investigating clinical heterogeneity between controlled clinical trials included in systematic reviews. We extracted recommendations, assessed resources for risk of bias, and collated the recommendations.

RESULTS

One hundred and one resources were collected, including narrative reviews, methodological reviews, statistical methods papers, and textbooks. These resources generally had a low risk of bias, but there was minimal consensus among them. Resources suggested that planned investigations of clinical heterogeneity should be made explicit in the protocol of the review; clinical experts should be included on the review team; a set of clinical covariates should be chosen considering variables from the participant level, intervention level, outcome level, research setting, or others unique to the research question; covariates should have a clear scientific rationale; there should be a sufficient number of trials per covariate; and results of any such investigations should be interpreted with caution.

CONCLUSIONS

Though the consensus was minimal, there were many recommendations in the literature for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews. Formal recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of controlled trials are required.

Knowledge translation of research findings

BACKGROUND

One of the most consistent findings from clinical and health services research is the failure to translate research into practice and policy. As a result of these evidence-practice and policy gaps, patients fail to benefit optimally from advances in healthcare and are exposed to unnecessary risks of iatrogenic harms, and healthcare systems are exposed to unnecessary expenditure resulting in significant opportunity costs. Over the last decade, there has been increasing international policy and research attention on how to reduce the evidence-practice and policy gap. In this paper, we summarise the current concepts and evidence to guide knowledge translation activities, defined as T2 research (the translation of new clinical knowledge into improved health). We structure the article around five key questions: what should be transferred; to whom should research knowledge be transferred; by whom should research knowledge be transferred; how should research knowledge be transferred; and, with what effect should research knowledge be transferred?

DISCUSSION

We suggest that the basic unit of knowledge translation should usually be up-to-date systematic reviews or other syntheses of research findings. Knowledge translators need to identify the key messages for different target audiences and to fashion these in language and knowledge translation products that are easily assimilated by different audiences. The relative importance of knowledge translation to different target audiences will vary by the type of research and appropriate endpoints of knowledge translation may vary across different stakeholder groups. There are a large number of planned knowledge translation models, derived from different disciplinary, contextual (i.e., setting), and target audience viewpoints. Most of these suggest that planned knowledge translation for healthcare professionals and consumers is more likely to be successful if the choice of knowledge translation strategy is informed by an assessment of the likely barriers and facilitators. Although our evidence on the likely effectiveness of different strategies to overcome specific barriers remains incomplete, there is a range of informative systematic reviews of interventions aimed at healthcare professionals and consumers (i.e., patients, family members, and informal carers) and of factors important to research use by policy makers.

SUMMARY

There is a substantial (if incomplete) evidence base to guide choice of knowledge translation activities targeting healthcare professionals and consumers. The evidence base on the effects of different knowledge translation approaches targeting healthcare policy makers and senior managers is much weaker but there are a profusion of innovative approaches that warrant further evaluation.

Knowledge translation of research findings

BACKGROUND

One of the most consistent findings from clinical and health services research is the failure to translate research into practice and policy. As a result of these evidence-practice and policy gaps, patients fail to benefit optimally from advances in healthcare and are exposed to unnecessary risks of iatrogenic harms, and healthcare systems are exposed to unnecessary expenditure resulting in significant opportunity costs. Over the last decade, there has been increasing international policy and research attention on how to reduce the evidence-practice and policy gap. In this paper, we summarise the current concepts and evidence to guide knowledge translation activities, defined as T2 research (the translation of new clinical knowledge into improved health). We structure the article around five key questions: what should be transferred; to whom should research knowledge be transferred; by whom should research knowledge be transferred; how should research knowledge be transferred; and, with what effect should research knowledge be transferred?

DISCUSSION

We suggest that the basic unit of knowledge translation should usually be up-to-date systematic reviews or other syntheses of research findings. Knowledge translators need to identify the key messages for different target audiences and to fashion these in language and knowledge translation products that are easily assimilated by different audiences. The relative importance of knowledge translation to different target audiences will vary by the type of research and appropriate endpoints of knowledge translation may vary across different stakeholder groups. There are a large number of planned knowledge translation models, derived from different disciplinary, contextual (i.e., setting), and target audience viewpoints. Most of these suggest that planned knowledge translation for healthcare professionals and consumers is more likely to be successful if the choice of knowledge translation strategy is informed by an assessment of the likely barriers and facilitators. Although our evidence on the likely effectiveness of different strategies to overcome specific barriers remains incomplete, there is a range of informative systematic reviews of interventions aimed at healthcare professionals and consumers (i.e., patients, family members, and informal carers) and of factors important to research use by policy makers.

SUMMARY

There is a substantial (if incomplete) evidence base to guide choice of knowledge translation activities targeting healthcare professionals and consumers. The evidence base on the effects of different knowledge translation approaches targeting healthcare policy makers and senior managers is much weaker but there are a profusion of innovative approaches that warrant further evaluation.

Towards a sociology of knowledge translation: the importance of being dis-interested in knowledge translation

Over the last 15 years there has been an increasingly energetic search for theories and definitions in the burgeoning area of knowledge translation (KT) in the health care context. The focus has been on the design and evaluation of KT activities with little attention to developing a considered KT theoretical/methodological approach that takes a more distanced critical inquiry to the studying of KT interventions. As such, what has been overlooked in the health professions KT literature to date is a suitably complex conceptualisation of translation that encompasses the multiplicity of KT interventions, the dynamic environments in which they are occurring, and the production of new knowledge which arises from their interactions. Attending to these epistemological issues; i.e. issues of the type of knowledge and how it is produced, is crucial to developing a relational understanding of the production and emergence of context-specific clinical knowledge and practice in KT processes. Such an approach is compared to the traditional KT evaluations by KT practitioners themselves of the compliance or non-compliance of individual and organisational behaviour change. A Sociology of KT (SKT) is proposed to complement the applied and evaluative research practice of implementing planned action KT activities. The purpose of a SKT basic research agenda is to understand both the context-specific nature of KT interventions and the epistemological premises of the activities of KT implementers themselves, in order to advance the science of KT and inform, complement and add to the success of applied and evaluative KT research in the future.

Collaboration between infection control and occupational health in three continents: a success story with international impact

Globalization has been accompanied by the rapid spread of infectious diseases, and further strain on working conditions for health workers globally. Post-SARS, Canadian occupational health and infection control researchers got together to study how to better protect health workers, and found that training was indeed perceived as key to a positive safety culture. This led to developing information and communication technology (ICT) tools. The research conducted also showed the need for better workplace inspections, so a workplace audit tool was also developed to supplement worker questionnaires and the ICT. When invited to join Ecuadorean colleagues to promote occupational health and infection control, these tools were collectively adapted and improved, including face-to-face as well as on-line problem-based learning scenarios. The South African government then invited the team to work with local colleagues to improve occupational health and infection control, resulting in an improved web-based health information system to track incidents, exposures, and occupational injury and diseases. As the H1N1 pandemic struck, the online infection control course was adapted and translated into Spanish, as was a novel skill-building learning tool that permits health workers to practice selecting personal protective equipment. This tool was originally developed in collaboration with the countries from the Caribbean region and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO). Research from these experiences led to strengthened focus on building capacity of health and safety committees, and new modules are thus being created, informed by that work.The products developed have been widely heralded as innovative and interactive, leading to their inclusion into "toolkits" used internationally. The tools used in Canada were substantially improved from the collaborative adaptation process for South and Central America and South Africa. This international collaboration between occupational health and infection control researchers led to the improvement of the research framework and development of tools, guidelines and information systems. Furthermore, the research and knowledge-transfer experience highlighted the value of partnership amongst Northern and Southern researchers in terms of sharing resources, experiences and knowledge.

Missing and accounted for: gaps and areas of wealth in the public health review literature

BACKGROUND

High-quality review evidence is useful for informing and influencing public health policy and practice decisions. However, certain topic areas lack representation in terms of the quantity and quality of review literature available. The objectives of this paper are to identify the quantity, as well as quality, of review-level evidence available on the effectiveness of public health interventions for public health decision makers.

METHODS

Searches conducted on http://www.health-evidence.ca produced an inventory of public health review literature in 21 topic areas. Gaps and areas of wealth in the review literature, as well as the proportion of reviews rated methodologically strong, moderate, or weak were identified. The top 10 topic areas of interest for registered users and visitors of http://www.health-evidence.ca were extracted from user profile data and Google Analytics.

RESULTS

Registered users' top three interests included: 1) healthy communities, 2) chronic diseases, and 3) nutrition. The top three preferences for visitors included: 1) chronic diseases, 2) physical activity, and 3) addiction/substance use. All of the topic areas with many (301+) available reviews were of interest to registered users and/or visitors (mental health, physical activity, addiction/substance use, adolescent health, child health, nutrition, adult health, and chronic diseases). Conversely, the majority of registered users and/or visitors did not have preference for topic areas with few (≤ 150) available reviews (food safety and inspection, dental health, environmental health) with the exception of social determinants of health and healthy communities. Across registered users' and visitors' topic areas of preference, 80.2% of the reviews were of well-done methodological quality, with 43.5% of reviews having a strong quality rating and 36.7% a moderate review quality rating.

CONCLUSIONS

In topic areas in which many reviews are available, higher level syntheses are needed to guide policy and practice. For other topic areas with few reviews, it is necessary to determine whether primary study evidence exists, or is needed, so that reviews can be conducted in the future. Considering that less than half of the reviews available on http://www.health-evidence.ca are of strong methodological quality, the quality of the review-level evidence needs to improve across the range of public health topic areas.

"Integrated knowledge translation" for globally oriented public health practitioners and scientists: Framing together a sustainable transfrontier knowledge translation vision

The development of a dynamic leadership coalition between practitioners and researchers/scientists – which is known in Canada as integrated knowledge translation (KT) – can play a major role in bridging the know-do gap in the health care and public health sectors. In public health, and especially in globally oriented public health, integrated KT is a dynamic, interactive (collaborative), and nonlinear phenomenon that goes beyond a reductionist vision of knowledge translation, to attain inter-, multi-, and even transdisciplinary status. Intimately embedded in its socioenvironmental context and closely connected with the complex interventions of multiple actors, the nonlinear process of integrated KT is based on a double principle: (1) the principle of transcendence of frontiers (sectorial, disciplinary, geographic, cultural, and cognitive), and (2) the principle of integration of knowledge beyond these frontiers. However, even though many authors agree on the overriding importance of integrated KT, there is as yet little understanding of the causal framework of integrated KT. Here, one can ask two general questions. Firstly, what “determines” integrated KT? Secondly, even if one wanted to apply a “transfrontier knowledge translation” vision, how should one go about doing so? For example, what would be the nature and qualities of a representative research program that applied a “transfrontier collaboration” approach? This paper focuses on the determinants of integrated KT within the burgeoning field of knowledge translation research (KT research). The paper is based on the results of a concurrent mixed method design which dealt with the complexity of building and sustaining effective coalitions and partnerships in the health care and public health sectors. The aims of this paper are: (1) to present an “integrated KT” conceptual framework which is global-context-sensitive, and (2) to promote the incorporation of a new “transfrontier knowledge translation” approach/vision designed primary for globally oriented public health researchers and health scientists.

Cross-topic learning for work prioritization in systematic review creation and update

OBJECTIVE

Machine learning systems can be an aid to experts performing systematic reviews (SRs) by automatically ranking journal articles for work-prioritization. This work investigates whether a topic-specific automated document ranking system for SRs can be improved using a hybrid approach, combining topic-specific training data with data from other SR topics.

DESIGN

A test collection was built using annotated reference files from 24 systematic drug class reviews. A support vector machine learning algorithm was evaluated with cross-validation, using seven different fractions of topic-specific training data in combination with samples from the other 23 topics. This approach was compared to both a baseline system, which used only topic-specific training data, and to a system using only the nontopic data sampled from the remaining topics.

MEASUREMENTS

Mean area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC) was used as the measure of comparison.

RESULTS

On average, the hybrid system improved mean AUC over the baseline system by 20%, when topic-specific training data were scarce. The system performed significantly better than the baseline system at all levels of topic-specific training data. In addition, the system performed better than the nontopic system at all but the two smallest fractions of topic specific training data, and no worse than the nontopic system with these smallest amounts of topic specific training data.

CONCLUSIONS

Automated literature prioritization could be helpful in assisting experts to organize their time when performing systematic reviews. Future work will focus on extending the algorithm to use additional sources of topic-specific data, and on embedding the algorithm in an interactive system available to systematic reviewers during the literature review process.

Knowledge Translation in Disability and Rehabilitation Research

Knowledge translation (KT) has emerged recently in the health science community as a means to address perceived gaps in the application of the best research to treatment of disease. Specifically, in the area of disability and rehabilitation research, the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) has identified KT as one of the three areas for critical outcome achievement. This article analyzes some of the issues raised by the notion of KT. First, the article puts KT in the broader context of the study of knowledge flow problems. Second, it introduces the knowledge value mapping (KVM) framework as an avenue for addressing some of the fundamental issues that KT raises in the context of disability and rehabilitation research. Third, it illustrates the application of the framework with a KVM case study of accessible currency. Finally, it discusses the implications of the case study in the broader context of health research agencies such as NIDRR.

An innovative telemedicine knowledge translation program to improve quality of care in intensive care units: protocol for a cluster randomized pragmatic trial

BACKGROUND

There are challenges to timely adoption of, and ongoing adherence to, evidence-based practices known to improve patient care in the intensive care unit (ICU). Quality improvement initiatives using a collaborative network approach may increase the use of such practices. Our objective is to evaluate the effectiveness of a novel knowledge translation program for increasing the proportion of patients who appropriately receive the following six evidence-based care practices: venous thromboembolism prophylaxis; ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention; spontaneous breathing trials; catheter-related bloodstream infection prevention; decubitus ulcer prevention; and early enteral nutrition.

METHODS AND DESIGN

We will conduct a pragmatic cluster randomized active control trial in 15 community ICUs and one academic ICU in Ontario, Canada. The intervention is a multifaceted videoconferenced educational and problem-solving forum to organize knowledge translation strategies, including comparative audit and feedback, educational sessions from content experts, and dissemination of algorithms. Fifteen individual ICUs (clusters) will be randomized to receive quality improvement interventions targeting one of the best practices during each of six study phases. Each phase lasts four months during the first study year and three months during the second. At the end of each study phase, ICUs are assigned to an intervention for a best practice not yet received according to a random schedule. The primary analysis will use patient-level process-of-care data to measure the intervention's effect on rates of adoption and adherence of each best practice in the targeted ICU clusters versus controls.

DISCUSSION

This study design evaluates a new system for knowledge translation and quality improvement across six common ICU problems. All participating ICUs receive quality improvement initiatives during every study phase, improving buy-in. This study design could be considered for other quality improvement interventions and in other care settings.

From consultation-liaison psychiatry to integrated care for multiple and complex needs

The aim of the present study was to review the ways in which contemporary medicine addresses physical/psychiatric multimorbidity, to review the underlying concepts and methodologies used, and to propose a novel approach that may help consultation-liaison psychiatry (CLP) position itself better in the health-care field. A Medline search of the terms 'consultation-liaison psychiatry', 'integrated care', 'quality assurance' and 'qualitative methodology', was complemented by study of the literature on complexity theory and by discussions with colleagues in both the health science and sociology fields. There is a growing realization that presentation with multimorbidity of both physical and psychiatric disorders is the norm. Other health-care disciplines have responded quickly to meeting the multiple and complex needs of such patients, attracting funding to an extent that CLP has been unable to achieve. Uncritical application, however, of integrated care technology based on evidence from randomized controlled trials has produced disappointing results. There is a growing realization that such quantitative methods need to be complemented by in-depth exploration using non-traditional methods including qualitative ones, and drawing on complexity theory. The Cochrane Collaboration is exploring this. As CLP and other medical and health-care disciplines face the challenge of patients with multimorbidity, they need to find acceptable answers to the question of what works for whom in what context for patients with multiple and complex needs. CLP can contribute its rich experience in the qualitative approaches that will be needed in research addressing this question, but needs help from other disciplines to refine its techniques so that its contributions are considered valid. The context for implementing effective interventions derived from such studies will in future be that of transdisciplinary teams whose mode of working is empirically based and transparent. CLP is well placed by dint of its psychodynamic and systems theory roots to provide leadership in this transformation in health-care delivery.

Effective medical education: insights from the Cochrane Library

In 2006, the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education highlighted the need for linking educational activities to changes in competence, performance, or patient outcomes. Hence, educational providers increasingly need to know what strategies are effective. The Cochrane Library is widely regarded as the best source of credible evidence concerning health care. The authors searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (issue 4 for 2006) using the search terms "continuing medical education," "medical education," and "continuing education." They conducted a second complementary search of this database by review group (Effective Practice and Organization of Care). Finally, the authors examined the references of recent review articles for Cochrane reviews and found 9 relevant reviews. The most effective educational methods were the most interactive. Combined didactic presentations and workshops were more effective than traditional didactic presentations alone. Medical education was more effective when more than 1 intervention occurred, especially if these interventions occurred over an extended period. Targeted education should focus on changing a behavior that is simple, because effect size is inversely proportional to the complexity of the behavior. In the era of evidence-based medicine, interventions-including educational ones-should reflect the best available evidence. Cochrane reviews of randomized controlled trials of educational methods provide important guidance that often challenges traditional didactic approaches. Integrating the findings from the Cochrane reviews may allow continuing medical education to be more successful in bringing about changes to healthcare providers' behavior.

TARGET AUDIENCE

Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Physicians.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completion of this article, the reader should be able to explain the scientific evidence concerning the effectiveness of various techniques used for continuing medical education, state the relative value of such techniques as traditional didactic lectures, conferences led by local opinion leaders, interactive workshops, and educational outreach visits, and identify the value and limitations of teaching critical appraisal skills.

Will genomics widen or help heal the schism between medicine and public health?

We discuss the "schism" between medicine and public health in light of advances in genomics and the expected evolution of health care toward personalized treatment and prevention. Undoubtedly, genomics could deepen the divide between the two worlds, but it also represents an important and perhaps unique opportunity for healing the schism, given the volume of new scientific discoveries and their potential applications in all areas of health and disease. We argue that the integration of genomics into health care and disease prevention requires a strong medicine-public health partnership in the context of a population approach to a translational research agenda that includes four overlapping areas: (1) a joint focus on prevention-a traditional public health concern but now a promise of genomics in the realm of individualized primary prevention and early detection, (2) a population perspective, which requires a large amount of population-level data to validate gene discoveries for clinical applications, (3) commitment to evidence-based knowledge integration with thousands of potential genomic applications in practice, and (4) emphasis on health services research to evaluate outcomes, costs, and benefits in the real world. A strong medicine-public health partnership in the genomics era is needed for the translation of all scientific discoveries for the benefit of population health.

AACAP 2005 Research Forum: speeding the adoption of evidence-based practice in pediatric psychiatry

OBJECTIVES

At the 2005 Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP), the Academy's Workgroup on Research conducted a Research Forum entitled "Increasing Research Literacy Through the Adoption of Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) in Pediatric Psychiatry."

METHOD

Forum participants focused on speeding the adoption of EBP across five areas: EBP as the preferred heuristic for teaching research literacy, use of EBP in training programs, dissemination of EBP in clinical practice, EBP in partnership with industry, and EBP as a framework for developing practice guidelines.

RESULTS

EBP provides an easy-to-understand method for accessing and evaluating the research literature and then applying this information to decisions about patient care. Although EBP has been gaining greater visibility in pediatric psychiatry, it is far from the preferred heuristic. To move the field toward fully embracing EBP will require greater understanding of what EBP is (and is not), educating mental health professionals in EBP skills, access to EBP resources, and a commitment to apply EBP to the conceptualization and design of research protocols and practice guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric psychiatry would benefit from a principled commitment to follow other areas of medicine in adopting EBP.

Theriogenology and developments in epidemiology: future opportunities?

The concepts and methods of the different branches of epidemiology, particularly clinical epidemiology, have much to offer the discipline of theriogenology. As with theriogenology, epidemiologic methods evolve when technological innovation enables new approaches to old problems. The recent emergence, from clinical epidemiology, of the evidence-based medicine paradigm in human medicine, and the associated developments of systematic reviews and meta-analysis, present new opportunities for collaboration and synergy between the two disciplines.