Students: help us review these resources!
Posted on 24th November 2016 by Selena Ryan-Vig
With big thanks to one of our partners, Testing Treatments interactive, we’re adding lots more resources and tools to our library of resources on the Students 4 Best Evidence website. But we’d like to hear from you students about what you make of them and how useful you find them. Please get in touch if you’d like to write a short review about any of the resources below. You need not have ever blogged before and you can use the questions below as a guide.
Briefly, what is the resource / what is it about?
Who it is aimed at? (e.g. undergraduates)
Roughly how long did it take you to read/view/complete?
How did you find it? (e.g. was it clear or difficult to understand?)
Do you feel it improved your understanding?
What problems did you find with it (if any) / how do you think it could be improved?
Overall, what would you score the resource out of 5? (and why?)
1. Testing Treatments (also available as an audiobook)
Testing Treatments is a book to help the public understand why fair tests of treatments are needed, what they are, and how to use them. Available for free online: http://www.testingtreatments.org/book/ and as an audiobook: http://www.testingtreatments.org/book/#listen
2. Video games and health improvement: a literature review of randomized controlled trials
This is a critical appraisal of a non-systematic review of randomized trials of video games for improving health.
http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/g4h.2012.0031?journalCode=g4h&
3. Fair tests of treatments: a quick guide for journalists
When deadlines are pressing, how can journalists tell whether to believe claims about the effects of a new treatment or breakthrough?
http://www.europeanhealthjournalism.com/
4. Ben Goldacre on TED, on drug companies and hidden data.
Ben Goldacre’s lecture at TEDglobal, in which he describes how pharmaceutical companies harm patients by failing to report negative outcomes
http://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_what_doctors_don_t_know_about_the_drugs_they_prescribe
5. What does a positive genetic test mean? The example of coeliac disease
Video tutorial explores the ways in which evidence about the effectiveness of genetic testing can be misrepresented in advertising.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIGp5u3Wvco&feature=youtu.be
6. DISCERN online
A questionnaire providing a valid and reliable way of assessing the quality of written information on treatment choices.
http://www.discern.org.uk/index.php
7. Informed Health Choices Podcasts
Each episode includes a short story with an example of a treatment claim and a simple explanation of a Key Concept used to assess that claim
http://www.informedhealthchoices.org/podcast-for-parents/
8. Know Your Chances
This book has been shown in two randomized trials to improve peoples’ understanding of risk in the context of health care choices.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23469386
9. Annals Graphic Medicine: How screening is portrayed in the media
A cartoon series addressing the theme “Earlier is not necessarily better”.
10. Interactive PowerPoint Presentation about Clinical Trials
An interactive Powerpoint presentation for people thinking about participating in a clinical trial or interested in learning about them.
http://www.testingtreatments.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/ECRAN-Powerpoint.ppt
11. Smart Health Choices: making sense of health advice
The Smart Health Choices e-book explains how to make informed health decisions.
12. Evidence Based Medicine Matters: Examples of where EBM has benefitted patients
Booklet containing 15 examples submitted by Royal Colleges where Evidence-Based Medicine has benefited clinical practice.
http://www.testingtreatments.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Evidence-Based-Medicine-Matters.pdf
13. Confidence Intervals – CASP
The p-value gives no direct indication of how large or important the estimated effect size is. So, confidence intervals are often preferred.
14. Clinical Significance – CASP
To understand results of a trial it is important to understand the question it was asking.
15. Statistical Significance – CASP
In a well-conducted randomized trial, the groups being compared should differ from each other only by chance and by the treatment received.
16. P Values – CASP
Statistical significance is usually assessed by appeal to a p-value, a probability, which can take any value between 0 and 1 (certain).
17. Making sense of results – CASP
This module introduces the key concepts required to make sense of statistical information presented in research papers.
http://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/interactive-learning/fae/making-sense-of-results
18. Screening – CASP
This module on screening has been designed to help people evaluate screening programmes.
http://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/interactive-learning/screening
19. Systematic reviews – CASP
This unit looks at Critical Appraisal of systematic reviews.
http://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/interactive-learning/fae/systematic-reviews
20. Randomised control trials – CASP
This module looks at the critical appraisal of randomised trials.
http://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/interactive-learning/fae/randomised-control-trials
21. CASP: making sense of evidence
The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) website with resources for teaching critical appraisal.
22. Common sources of bias
Bias (the conscious or unconscious influencing of a study and its results) can occur in different ways and renders studies less dependable.
http://www.understandinghealthresearch.org/useful-information/common-sources-of-bias-2
23. Surrogate markers may not tell the whole story
A webpage explaining the limitations of using surrogate outcome markers in clinical research.
24. Mixed Messages about Statistical Significance
A webpage explaining the difference between statistical and practical significance.
25. Science fact or fiction? Making sense of cancer stories
A Cancer Research UK blog, explaining how to assess the quality of health claims about cancer.
26. Double blind studies
A webpage discussing the importance of blinding trial participants and researchers to intervention allocation.
http://www.mendosa.com/bratman.htm
27. CEBM – Study Designs
A short article explaining the relative strengths and weaknesses of different types of study design for assessing treatment effects.
http://www.cebm.net/study-designs/
28. DISCERN online
A questionnaire providing a valid and reliable way of assessing the quality of written information on treatment choices.
http://www.discern.org.uk/index.php
29. The 10 stuff-ups we all make when interpreting research
An article explaining 10 key errors we might make when interpreting research.
http://theconversation.com/the-10-stuff-ups-we-all-make-when-interpreting-research-30816
30. Observational Studies – does the language fit the evidence?
A webpage explaining observational studies and their advantage and disadvantages.
31. Relative or absolute measures of effects
Dr Chris Cates’ article explaining absolute and relative effects of treatment effects.
http://www.nntonline.net/relative-or-absolute-measures-of-effect/
32. The perils and pitfalls of subgroup analysis
Dr Chris Cates’ article demonstrating why subgroup analysis can be untrustworthy.
http://www.nntonline.net/the-perils-and-pitfalls-of-sub-group-analysis/
33. Reporting results of studies
Dr Chris Cates’ article discussing how to report study results, with emphasis on P-values and confidence intervals.
http://www.nntonline.net/reporting-results-of-studies/
34. Combining the Results from Clinical Trials
Chris Cates notes that emphasizing the results of patients in particular sub-groups in a trial can be misleading.
http://www.nntonline.net/combining-the-results-from-clinical-trials/
35. AllTrials: All Trials | All Results Reported
AllTrials aims to correct the situation in which studies remain unpublished or are published but with selective reporting of outcomes.
36. Association is not the same as causation. Let’s say that again: Association is not the same as causation.
This article explains how to tell when correlation or association has been confused with causation.
http://www.testingtreatments.org/association-not-causation-lets-say-association-not-causation/
37. Shared decision-making
This resource from the Health Foundation shows how shared decision-making can be made to work in a typical consultation.
http://www.health.org.uk/programmes/magic-shared-decision-making
38. Tipsheet for reporting on drugs, devices and medical technologies
Questions that will be familiar to reporters covering health and medicine.
39. Tips for understanding Intention-to-Treat analysis
Ignoring non-compliance with assigned treatments leads to biased estimates of treatment effects. ITT analysis reduces these biases.
http://www.healthnewsreview.org/toolkit/tips-for-understanding-studies/intention-to-treat-analysis/
40. Tips for understanding Absolute vs. Relative Risk
Absolute Differences between the effects of two treatments matter more to most people than Relative Differences.
http://www.healthnewsreview.org/toolkit/tips-for-understanding-studies/absolute-vs-relative-risk/
41. Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis: Information Overload
None of us can keep up with the sheer volume of material published in medical journals each week.
http://www.nntonline.net/systematic-reviews-and-meta-analyses/
42. Tips for understanding Non-inferiority Trials
A non-inferiority experiment endeavours to show that a new intervention is ‘not unacceptably worse’ than the comparison intervention.
http://www.healthnewsreview.org/toolkit/tips-for-understanding-studies/non-inferiority-trials/
43. Cyagen is paying for citations
Pharmaceutical company Cyagen offers researchers and other writers $100 or more for citing their products in publications.
44. Misconceptions about screening
Screening should not be for everyone or all diseases. It should only be offered when it is likely to do good than harm.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/senseaboutscience/misconceptions-about-screening-qgrx
45. Making sense of randomized trials
A description of how clinical trials are constructed and analysed to ensure they provide fair comparisons of treatments.
http://www.aidsmap.com/Making-sense-of-randomised-trials/page/1411978/
46. Communicating with patients on evidence
This discussion paper from the US Institute of Medicine provides guidance on communicating evidence to patients.
http://www.testingtreatments.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/VSRT-Evidence.pdf
47. Shared Decision-Making
This resource from the Health Foundation shows how shared decision-making can be made to work in a typical consultation.
http://www.health.org.uk/programmes/magic-shared-decision-making
48. Critical Appraisal of Clinical Trials in Dermatology
A free online course created by University of Nottingham researchers and clinicians on critical appraisal of clinical trials in dermatology https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/toolkits/play_15277
