| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Get control of your email attachments. Connect all your Gmail accounts and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio will automatically organize your file attachments. You can also connect Dokkio to Drive, Dropbox, and Slack. Sign up for free.

View
 

Applicability

Page history last edited by Andrew Booth 5 years, 7 months ago

Assessing the applicability of the findings of a review

Suggested format for research

recommendations on the effects of treatments

Core elements

E Evidence (What is the current state of the evidence?)

P Population (What is the population of interest?)

I Intervention (What are the interventions of interest?)

C Comparison (What are the comparisons of interest?)

O Outcome (What are the outcomes of interest?)

T Time stamp (Date of recommendation)

Optional elements

d Disease burden or relevance

t Time aspect of core elements of EPICOT

s Appropriate study type according to local need

Brown, P., Brunnhuber, K., Chalkidou, K., Chalmers, I., Clarke, M., Fenton, M., ... & Young, P. (2006). How to formulate research recommendations. Bmj333(7572), 804-806.  

SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP): a framework for assessing the applicability of the findings of systematic reviews in different settings

Lavis JN, Oxman AD, Souza NM, Lewin S, Gruen RL, Fretheim A.  SUPPORT Tools for evidence-informed health policymaking (STP) 9: assessing the applicability of the findings of a systematic  review. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3271836/ Health research policy and systems 2009; 7 (suppl 1): S9

 

Framework to identify research gaps from systematic reviews

Framework incorporating characterization of the gap using PICOS elements (also including setting) and identification of reason(s) why gap exists as

(1) insufficient or imprecise information,

(2) biased information,

(3) inconsistency or unknown consistency,and

(4) not the right information.

Maps each reason to concepts from three common evidence-grading systems.

Robinson, K. A., Saldanha, I. J., & Mckoy, N. A. (2011). Development of a framework to identify research gaps from systematic reviews. Journal of clinical epidemiology64(12), 1325-1330.  

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.