This is the final blog in a series of 36 blogs explaining 36 key concepts we need to be able to understand to think critically about treatment claims.
Decisions about whether or not to use a treatment should be informed by the balance between the potential benefits and the potential harms, costs and other advantages and disadvantages of the treatment.
This is the twenty-second blog in a series of 36 blogs explaining 36 key concepts we need to be able to understand to think critically about treatment claims.
Even though a comparison of treatments has been published in a prestigious journal, it may not be a fair comparison and the results may not be reliable. Peer review (assessment of a study by others working in the same field) does not guarantee that published studies are reliable. Assessments vary and may not be systematic.
Critical appraisal tools (CATs) are commonly used by students and researchers alike, as a way of judging a study’s quality. In this blog, Dennis Neuen addresses the need to appraise these tools and has also collated a list of 12 CATs from all over the world.
This is the eighteenth blog in a series of 36 blogs explaining 36 key concepts we need to be able to understand to think critically about treatment claims.
If an outcome is measured differently in two comparison groups, differences in that outcome may be due to how the outcome was measured rather than because of the treatment received by people in each group. For example, if outcome assessors believe that a particular treatment works and they know which patients have received that treatment, they may be more likely to observe better outcomes in those who have received the treatment.
Register to become an S4BE Contributor
Another 20 minute tutorial from Tim.
The nuts and bolts 20 minute tutorial from Tim.
This new webpage from Cochrane UK is aimed at students of all ages. What is evidence-based practice? What is ‘best available research evidence’? Which resources will help you understand evidence and evidence-based practice, and search for evidence?