A5068078908- Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
- Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Delphi Technique in Research
- Health and Medical Research Impacts
- Healthcare cost, quality, practices
- Health Sciences Research and Education
- COVID-19 and healthcare impacts
- Health Policy Implementation Science
- Primary Care and Health Outcomes
- Tuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
- Chronic Disease Management Strategies
- Diverse Scientific Research Studies
- Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
- Child and Adolescent Health
- Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare
- Disaster Response and Management
- Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
- Climate Change and Health Impacts
- scientometrics and bibliometrics research
- Medical Research and Practices
- Ethics in medical practice
University of Toronto
2025
Unity Health Toronto
2023-2024
Maastricht University
2021-2024
Inserm
2020-2022
Université Paris Cité
2020-2022
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
2015-2022
Ottawa Hospital
2015-2022
Centre de Recherche Épidémiologie et Statistique
2020-2022
University of Ottawa
2015-2022
Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers
2022
Elaine Beller and colleagues from the PRISMA for Abstracts group provide a reporting guidelines abstracts of systematic reviews in journals at conferences.
The promotion of health equity, the absence avoidable and unfair differences in outcomes, is a global imperative. Systematic reviews are an important source evidence for decision makers but have been found to lack assessments intervention effects on equity. Preferred Reporting Items Reviews Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 27-item checklist intended improve transparency reporting systematic reviews. We developed equity extension PRISMA (PRISMA-E 2012) help reviewers identify, extract, synthesize...
Background In biomedical research, it is often desirable to seek consensus among individuals who have differing perspectives and experience. This important when evidence emerging, inconsistent, limited, or absent. Even research abundant, clinical recommendations, policy decisions, priority-setting may still require agreement from multiple, sometimes ideologically opposed parties. Despite their prominence influence on key methods are poorly reported. Our aim was develop the first reporting...
The Cochrane Collaboration is a global network whose aim to improve health-care decision making through systematic reviews of the effects interventions. are published in Database Systematic Reviews within Library ( http://www.thecochranelibrary.com), and regularly updated as new evidence arises. undertaken by teams volunteer authors, who have access free training resources, reference texts software for preparing maintaining their review. Here we describe steps involved undertake or update an...
The importance of adequate intervention descriptions in minimising research waste and improving usability reproducibility has gained attention the past few years. Nearly all focus to date been on reporting randomised trials. Yet clinicians are encouraged use systematic reviews, whenever available, rather than single trials inform their practice. This article explores problem implications incomplete details during planning, conduct, reviews makes recommendations for review authors, peer...
Replication is an essential part of the scientific method, yet replication systematic reviews too often overlooked, and done unnecessarily or poorly. Excessive (doing same study repeatedly) unethical a cause research wastage. This article provides consensus based guidance on when to replicate not reviews.
Ideas and Opinions15 September 2020The COVID-NMA Project: Building an Evidence Ecosystem for the COVID-19 PandemicFREEIsabelle Boutron, MD, PhD, Anna Chaimani, Joerg J. Meerpohl, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, MPhil, Declan Devane, Gabriel Rada, David Tovey, MBChB, Giacomo Grasselli, Philippe Ravaud, PhD,, Consortium*Isabelle PhDUniversité de Paris, Centre of Research Epidemiology Statistics (CRESS), Inserm, Cochrane France, France (I.B., A.C., P.R.)Search more papers by this author, MDInstitute in...
Abstract Background Structured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide opportunity harness knowledge of experts support clinical decision making in areas uncertainty. They are widely used biomedical research, particular where disease characteristics resource limitations mean that high-quality evidence generation is difficult. However, poor reporting reach a – for example, not clearly explaining...
Abstract This paper is the initial Position Statement of Evidence Synthesis International, a new partnership organizations that produce, support and use evidence synthesis around world. The (i) argues for importance as research exercise to clarify what known from inform policy, practice personal decision making; (ii) discusses core issues such role in making, perspectives, participation democracy component ecosystems; (iii) 9 principles ESI on nature synthesis; (iv) lists 5 main goals...
When research evidence is limited, inconsistent, or absent, healthcare decisions and policies need to be based on consensus amongst interested stakeholders. In these processes, the knowledge, experience, expertise of health professionals, researchers, policymakers, public are systematically collected synthesised reach agreed clinical recommendations and/or priorities. However, despite influence exercises, methods used achieve agreement often poorly reported. The ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus...