Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 7. Deciding what evidence to include

Health Research Policy and Systems

Volumn 4, Issue , 2006, Pages

  Oxman, Andrew D ^a   Schünemann, Holger J ^b   Fretheim, Atle ^a  

^a NORWEGIAN KNOWLEDGE CENTRE FOR THE HEALTH SERVICES   (Norway)

^b REGINA ELENA NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDLINE; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

EID: 33845266392     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14784505     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1478-4505-4-19     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Lomas J Culyer T McCutcheon C McAuley L Law S Conceptualizing and Combining evidence for health system guidance Ottawa: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation 2005
2. Schünemann HJ Fretheim A Oxman AD Improving the Use of Research Evidence in Guideline Development: 9. Grading evidence and recommendations Health Res Policy Syst 2006
3. Counsell CE Clarke MJ Slattery J Sandercock PA The miracle of DICE therapy for acute stroke: Fact or fictional product of subgroup analysis? BMJ 1994 309 1677-81 7819982
4. Oxman AD Guyatt G When to believe a subgroup analysis Users' Guide to the Medical Literature. A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Chicago: AMA Press Guyatt G, Rennie D 2002 553-65
5. Global Programme on Evidence for Health Policy. Guidelines for WHO Guidelines Geneva: World Health Organisation 2003 (EIP/GPE/EQC/2003.1)
6. Panisset U A review of WHO recommendations published in 2005
7. Oxman AD Lavis J Fretheim A The use of research evidence in WHO recommendations
8. Harris RP Helfand M Woolf SH Lohr KN Mulrow CD Teutsch SM Atkins D for the Methods Word Group, third U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Current methods of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: A review of the process Am J Prev Med 2001 20 3S 21-35 10.1016/S0749-3797(01)00261-6 11306229
9. Jackson N Waters E for the Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in Health Promotion and Public Health Taskforce Criteria for the systematic review of health promotion and public health interventions Health Promotion International 2005 20 367-74 10.1093/heapro/dai022 16169885
10. Sheldon T Making evidence synthesis more useful for management and policy-making J Health Serv Res Policy 2005 10 Suppl 1 1-5 10.1258/ 1355819054308521 16053579
11. Ogilvie D Egan M Hamilton V Petticrew Sysematic reviews of health effects of social inteHventions: 2. best available evidence: how low should you go? J Epidemiol Community Health 2005 59 886-92 10.1136/ jech.2005.034199 16166365
12. Nutbeam D The challenge to provide 'evidence' in health promotion Health Promotion International 1999 14 99-101 10.1093/heapro/14.2.99
13. Petticrew M Presumed innocent. Why we need systematic reviews of social policies Am J Prev Med 2003 23 suppl 3 2-3 10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00650-5
14. Petticrew M Roberts H Evidence, hierarchies, and typologies: Horses for courses J Epidemiol Community Health 2003 57 527-9 10.1136/jech.57.7.527 12821702
15. Rychetnik L Frommer M Hawe P Shiell A Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions J Epidemiol Community Health 2002 56 119-27 10.1136/jech.56.2.119 11812811
16. Kramer MS Randomized trials and public health interventions: Time to end the scientific double standard Clinics in Perinatology 2003 30 351-61 10.1016/S0095-5108(03)00024-1 12875359
17. Grimshaw J McAuley LM Bero LA Grilli R Oxman AD Ramsay Vale L Zwarenstein M Systematic reviews of the effectiveness of quality improvement strategies and programmes Qual Saf Health Care 2003 12 298-303 10.1136/qhc.12.4.298 12897365
18. Loke YK Price D Herxheimer A editors Including adverse effects Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 4.2.5 [updated May 2005] Higgins JPT, Green S Appendix 6b
19. McIntosh HM Nerys NF Woolacott F Bagnall AM Assessing harmful effects in systematic Reviews BMC Medical Research Methodology 2004 4 19 497041 15260887 10.1186/1471-2288-4-19
20. Papanikolaou PN Ioannidis JPA Availability of large-scale evidence on specific harms from systematic reviews of randomized trials Am J Med 2004 117 582-9 10.1016/j.amjmed.2004.04.026 15465507
21. Higgins JPT Green S editors 4.2.4 What types of study designs? Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions [updated May 2005] Higgins JPT, Green S http://www.cochrane.org/resources/handbook/ hbook.htm Section 4
22. Khan KS Kleijnen J STAGE II. Conducting the review. PHASE 4. Selection of studies Undertaking Systematic Reviews of Research on Effectiveness. CRD's Guidance for those Carrying Out or Commissioning Reviews. CRD Report Number 4 2 2001 http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/pdf/crd4_ph4.pdf
23. Festing MFW Altman DG Guidelines for the Design and Statistical Analysis of Experiments Using Laboratory Animals ILAR Journal 2002 43 244-58 12391400
24. Briss PA Zaza S Pappaioanou M Developing an evidence-based guide to community preventive services-methods Am J Prev Med 2000 18 1S 35-43 10.1016/S0749-3797(99)00119-1 10806978
25. Campbell Systematic Reviews. Guidelines for the Preparation of Review Protocols. (Version 1.0: January 1, 2001) http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/c2_protocol_guidelines%20doc.pdf
26. Oxman AD Fretheim A Schünemann HJ Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: Introduction Health Res Policy Syst 2006
27. Heinsman DT Shadish WR Assignment methods in experimentation: When do nonrandomized experiments approximate answers from randomized experiments? Psychological Methods 1996 1 154-69 10.1037/ 1082-989X.1.2.154
28. Britton A McKee M Black N McPherson K Sanderson C Bain C Choosing between randomised and non-randomised studies: A systematic review Health Technol Assessment 1998 2 #13
29. Kunz R Vist G Oxman AD Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials The Cochrane Database of Methodology Reviews 2002
30. MacLehose RR Reeves BC Harvey IM Sheldon TA Russell IT Black AMS A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomised and non-randomised studies Health Technol Assessment 2000 4 34
31. Ioannidis JP Haidich AB Pappa M Pantazis N Kokori SI Tektonidou MB Contopoulos Ioannidis DG Lau J Comparison of evidence of treatment effects in randomized and nonrandomized studies JAMA 2001 286 821-30 10.1001/jama.286.7.821 11497536
32. King M Nazareth I Lampe F Bower P Chandler M Morou M Sibbald B Lai R Impact of participant and physician intervention preferences on randomized trials; a systematic review JAMA 2005 293 1089-99 10.1001/ jama.293.9.1089 15741531
33. Vist GE Hagen KB Devereaux PJ Bryant D Kristoffersen DT Oxman AD Systematic review to determine whether participation in a trial influences outcome BMJ 2005 330 1175 558011 15905256 10.1136/ bmj.330.7501.1175
34. Deeks JJ Dinnes J D'Amico R Sowden AJ Sakarovitch C Song F Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies Health Technol Assess 2003 7 27 1-173
35. Golder SP Loke YK McIntosh HM Room for improvement? A survey of the methods used in systematic reviews of adverse effects BMC Medical Research Methodology 2006 6 3 1402311 16441876 10.1186/1471-2288-6-3
36. Loke YK Derry S Incorporating adverse effects data into reviews: How to get started [abstract] 9th Annual Meeting for UK Contributors to the Cochrane Collaboration: Coventry 2003