Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Avoid new research that has not been scientifically reviewed (even if published in a peer-reviewed journal) Summarize scientific consensus, giving due weight to dissenting views; Describe the level of evidence of a given source; Avoid over-emphasizing single studies, particularly in vitro or animal studies; Use up-to-date evidence
Ioannidis has added to this work by contributing to a meta-epidemiological study which found that only 1 in 20 interventions tested in Cochrane Reviews have benefits that are supported by high-quality evidence. [5] He also contributed to research suggesting that the quality of this evidence does not seem to improve over time. [6]
Due to the inundation of original research in the field, there is a need for review articles which highlight relevant studies, results and trends. [4] The varying methods and participants used among original research studies can provide inconsistent results, thereby presenting a challenge in synthesising information using one common metric.
Continuing the research process, the investigator then carries out the research necessary to answer the research question, whether this involves reading secondary sources over a few days for an undergraduate term paper or carrying out primary research over years for a major project. When the research is complete and the researcher knows the ...
Respect the levels of evidence: Do not reject a higher-level source (e.g., a meta-analysis) in favor of a lower one (e.g., any primary source) because of personal objections to the inclusion criteria, references, funding sources, or conclusions in the higher-level source. Editors should not perform detailed academic peer review.
A large number of hierarchies of evidence have been proposed. Similar protocols for evaluation of research quality are still in development. So far, the available protocols pay relatively little attention to whether outcome research is relevant to efficacy (the outcome of a treatment performed under ideal conditions) or to effectiveness (the outcome of the treatment performed under ordinary ...
Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis, [1] although scientists also use evidence in other ways, such as when applying theories to practical problems. [2] Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretable in accordance with the scientific method.
The December 2020 version of the review stated that the "evidence [that the treatment saves babies] is robust, regardless of resource setting (high, middle or low)" and that further research should focus on "specific understudied subgroups such as multiple pregnancies and other high-risk obstetric groups, and the risks and benefits in the very ...