• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
A3 - Tailoring the presentation of systematic reviews to meet decision makers' needs - Moher - Salon E
 

A3 - Tailoring the presentation of systematic reviews to meet decision makers' needs - Moher - Salon E

on

  • 370 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
370
Views on SlideShare
370
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    A3 - Tailoring the presentation of systematic reviews to meet decision makers' needs - Moher - Salon E A3 - Tailoring the presentation of systematic reviews to meet decision makers' needs - Moher - Salon E Presentation Transcript

    • Tailoring the presentation of systematicreviews to meet decision makers’ needshospital setting
    • TOHTAP• The Ottawa Hospital Technology Assessment Program• TOHTAP is a knowledge support service for TOH SeniorManagement, and other TOH stakeholders to supportcost-effective decision-making• It is a collaboration between TOH and OHRI maximizingskill sets across both institutions• It uses systematic review methods to aggregateinformation about benefits, harms, and health economics• Pilot program
    • Produce• Rapid reviews• accelerated systematic reviews• Content• search, critically appraise, and aggregate• Output• report• must meet the needs of decision maker(s) (requester)• developed in partnership with decision maker(s)
    • Review outputs• Cochrane reviews• Evidence reports• Systematic review publications• TOHTAP reports• time to read• broad reading audience• policy „thoughts‟
    • Report production
    • Informative sidebar outlines theintended audience and explains thenature of included contentPrimary research question as the title“Key messages” section aims tosummarize overall findingsIntended to capture theattention of the end useras it may be all they read
    • Table of contents indicated each sub-section pertaining to the questionBrief background information on thesubject matter is presentedSystematic review evidence ishighlighted per question (includesAMSTAR rating)“Bottom line” subsections aim tosummarize the evidence under eachsub-section
    • Brief summary ofthe methodsused:searches; sources;eligibility criteria;screening/extraction methods;study typesincluded;reference to ROBReference toAMSTAR toolAuthorsConflicts ofinterestAcknowledgements
    • THANK YOU!
    • What is Quality of Evidence?• Much more than risk of bias• Reviewers‟ confidence in how close the observed estimate of effect isto the true effect• Categories:High (confident its close)Moderate (likely to be close, but could be substantially different)Low (may or may not be substantially different) andVery Low (likely to be substantially different)• Evaluated by comparison and by outcomes – patient important, up toseven, both benefit and harm, critical and important (9 point scale).• Quality of evidence for an outcome versus the overall quality ofevidence