Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/125761
Title: Methods proposed for monitoring the implementation of evidence-based research : a cross-sectional study
Authors: Puljak, Livia
Bala, Malgorzata M.
Zając, Joanna
Meštrović, Tomislav
Buttigieg, Sandra C.
Yanakoulia, Mary
Briel, Matthias
Lunny, Carole
Lesniak, Wiktoria
Poklepović Peričić, Tina
Alonso-Coello, Pablo
Clarke, Mike
Djulbegovic, Benjamin
Gartlehner, Gerald
Giannakou, Konstantinos
Glenny, Anne-Marie
Glenton, Claire
Guyatt, Gordon
Hemkens, Lars G.
Ioannidis, John P.A.
Jaeschke, Roman
Jørgensen, Karsten Juhl
Castro Martins-Pfeifer, Carolina
Marušić, Ana
Mbuagbaw, Lawrence
Meneses Echavez, Jose Francisco
Moher, David
Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara
Page, Matthew J.
Pérez-Gaxiola, Giordano
Robinson, Karen A.
Salanti, Georgia
Saldanha, Ian J.
Savović, Jelena
Thomas, James
Tricco, Andrea C.
Tugwell, Peter
van Hoof, Joost
Pieper, Dawid
Keywords: Evidence-based medicine
Systematic reviews (Medical research)
Medicine -- Research -- Evaluation
Bibliographical citations -- Evaluation
Medicine -- Research -- Methodology
Issue Date: 2024
Publisher: Elsevier
Citation: Puljak, L., Bala, M. M., Zając, J., Meštrović, T., Buttigieg, S., Yanakoulia, M.,...Pieper, D. (2024). Methods proposed for monitoring the implementation of evidence-based research: a cross-sectional study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 168, 111247.
Abstract: Objectives: Evidence-based research (EBR) is the systematic and transparent use of prior research to inform a new study so that it answers questions that matter in a valid, efficient, and accessible manner. This study surveyed experts about existing (e.g., citation analysis) and new methods for monitoring EBR and collected ideas about implementing these methods. Study Design and Setting: We conducted a cross-sectional study via an online survey between November 2022 and March 2023. Participants were experts from the fields of evidence synthesis and research methodology in health research. Open-ended questions were coded by recurring themes; descriptive statistics were used for quantitative questions. Results: Twenty-eight expert participants suggested that citation analysis should be supplemented with content evaluation (not just what is cited but also in which context), content expert involvement, and assessment of the quality of cited systematic reviews. They also suggested that citation analysis could be facilitated with automation tools. They emphasized that EBR monitoring should be conducted by ethics committees and funding bodies before the research starts. Challenges identified for EBR implementation monitoring were resource constraints and clarity on responsibility for EBR monitoring. Conclusion: Ideas proposed in this study for monitoring the implementation of EBR can be used to refine methods and define responsibility but should be further explored in terms of feasibility and acceptability. Different methods may be needed to determine if the use of EBR is improving over time.
URI: https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/125761
Appears in Collections:Scholarly Works - FacHScHSM



Items in OAR@UM are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.