Journal of evaluation in clinical practice
-
Review Meta Analysis
Supplemental perioperative oxygen for reducing surgical site infection: a meta-analysis.
To assess the efficacy of supplemental perioperative oxygenation for prevention of surgical site infection (SSI). Data sources Computerized PUBMED and MEDLINE search supplemented by manual searches for relevant articles. Study selection Randomized, controlled trials evaluating efficacy of supplemental perioperative oxygenation versus standard care for prevention of SSI in patients' undergoing colorectal surgery. Data synthesis Data on incidence of SSI were abstracted as dichotomous variables. Pooled estimates of the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were obtained using the DerSimonian and Laird random effects model and the Mantel-Haenzel fixed effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran Q statistic and I(2). ⋯ Our analysis showed that supplemental perioperative oxygenation is beneficial in preventing SSI in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Because of heterogeneity in study design and patient population, additional randomized trials are needed to determine whether this confers benefit in all patient populations undergoing other types of surgery. Supplemental perioperative oxygenation is a low-cost intervention that we recommend be implemented in patients undergoing colorectal surgery pending the results of further studies. Further research is needed to determine whether or not supplemental hyperoxia may cause unanticipated adverse effects.
-
Statistical tests of heterogeneity and bias, in particular publication bias, are very popular in meta-analyses. These tests use statistical approaches whose limitations are often not recognized. Moreover, it is often implied with inappropriate confidence that these tests can provide reliable answers to questions that in essence are not of statistical nature. ⋯ Here I discuss the major common challenges and flaws that emerge in using and interpreting statistical tests of heterogeneity and bias in meta-analyses. I discuss misinterpretations that can occur at the level of statistical inference, clinical/pragmatic inference and specific cause attribution. Suggestions are made on how to avoid these flaws, use these tests properly and learn from them.
-
The purpose of this paper is to explore new perspectives about difficulties academicians may have communicating with clinicians, obtaining subjects, and gaining compliance for their research. ⋯ Evidence to practice and practice to evidence redefines EBM as a circular integration of best research evidence, clinical expertise, and patient values.
-
Health-based journal clubs have been in place for over 100 years. Participants meet regularly to critique research articles, to improve their understanding of research design, statistics and critical appraisal. However, there is no standard process of conducting an effective journal club. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify core processes of a successful health journal club. ⋯ Characteristics of successful journal clubs included regular and anticipated meetings, mandatory attendance, clear long- and short-term purpose, appropriate meeting timing and incentives, a trained journal club leader to choose papers and lead discussion, circulating papers prior to the meeting, using the internet for wider dissemination and data storage, using established critical appraisal processes and summarizing journal club findings.