A body of evidence is not

rated up in quality if studies

A body of evidence is not

rated up in quality if studies yield consistent results, but may be rated down in quality if inconsistent. Criteria for evaluating consistency include similarity Blebbistatin mouse of point estimates, extent of overlap of confidence intervals, and statistical criteria including tests of heterogeneity and I(2). To explore heterogeneity, systematic review authors should generate and test a small number of a priori hypotheses related to patients, interventions, outcomes, and methodology. When inconsistency is large and unexplained, rating down quality for inconsistency is appropriate, particularly if some studies suggest substantial benefit, and others no effect or harm (rather than only large vs. small effects).

Apparent subgroup effects may be spurious. Credibility is increased if subgroup effects are based on a small number of a priori hypotheses with a specified direction; subgroup comparisons come from within rather than between studies; tests of interaction generate low P-values; and have a biological rationale. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.”
“House calls provide a unique perspective on patients’ environment and health problems. The demand for house calls is selleck inhibitor expected to increase considerably in future decades as the U.S. population ages. Although study results

have been inconsistent, house calls involving multidisciplinary teams may reduce hospital readmissions and long-term care facility stays. Common

indications for house calls are management of acute or chronic illnesses, and palliative care. Medicare beneficiaries must meet specific criteria to be eligible for home health services. The INHOMESSS mnemonic provides a checklist for components of a comprehensive house call. In addition to performing a clinical assessment, house calls may involve observing the patient performing daily activities, reconciling medication discrepancies, and evaluating home safety. House learn more calls can be integrated into practice with careful planning, including clustering house calls by geographic location and coordinating visits with other health care professionals and agencies. (Am Fam Physician. 2011;83(8):925-931. Copyright (c) 2011 American Academy of Family Physicians.)”
“Direct evidence comes from research that directly compares the interventions in which we are interested when applied to the populations in which we are interested and measures outcomes important to patients. Evidence can be indirect in one of four ways. First, patients may differ from those of interest (the term applicability is often used for this form of indirectness). Secondly, the intervention tested may differ from the intervention of interest. Decisions regarding indirectness of patients and interventions depend on an understanding of whether biological or social factors are sufficiently different that one might expect substantial differences in the magnitude of effect.

Comments are closed.