LIVIVO - The Search Portal for Life Sciences

zur deutschen Oberfläche wechseln
Advanced search

Search results

Result 1 - 5 of total 5

Search options

  1. Article ; Online: Priority III: top 10 rapid review methodology research priorities identified using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

    Beecher, Claire / Toomey, Elaine / Maeso, Beccy / Whiting, Caroline / Stewart, Derek C / Worrall, Andrew / Elliott, Jim / Smith, Maureen / Tierney, Theresa / Blackwood, Bronagh / Maguire, Teresa / Kampman, Melissa / Ling, Benny / Gill, Catherine / Healy, Patricia / Houghton, Catherine / Booth, Andrew / Garritty, Chantelle / Thomas, James /
    Tricco, Andrea C / Burke, Nikita N / Keenan, Ciara / Devane, Declan

    Journal of clinical epidemiology

    2022  Volume 151, Page(s) 151–160

    Abstract: Objectives: A rapid review is a form of evidence synthesis considered a resource-efficient alternative to the conventional systematic review. Despite a dramatic rise in the number of rapid reviews commissioned and conducted in response to the ... ...

    Abstract Objectives: A rapid review is a form of evidence synthesis considered a resource-efficient alternative to the conventional systematic review. Despite a dramatic rise in the number of rapid reviews commissioned and conducted in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, published evidence on the optimal methods of planning, doing, and sharing the results of these reviews is lacking. The Priority III study aimed to identify the top 10 unanswered questions on rapid review methodology to be addressed by future research.
    Study design and setting: A modified James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership approach was adopted. This approach used two online surveys and a virtual prioritization workshop with patients and the public, reviewers, researchers, clinicians, policymakers, and funders to identify and prioritize unanswered questions.
    Results: Patients and the public, researchers, reviewers, clinicians, policymakers, and funders identified and prioritized the top 10 unanswered research questions about rapid review methodology. Priorities were identified throughout the entire review process, from stakeholder involvement and formulating the question, to the methods of a systematic review that are appropriate to use, through to the dissemination of results.
    Conclusion: The results of the Priority III study will inform the future research agenda on rapid review methodology. We hope this will enhance the quality of evidence produced by rapid reviews, which will ultimately inform decision-making in the context of healthcare.
    Language English
    Publishing date 2022-08-28
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 639306-8
    ISSN 1878-5921 ; 0895-4356
    ISSN (online) 1878-5921
    ISSN 0895-4356
    DOI 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.08.002
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    Full text online

    More links

    Kategorien

    In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

    Uh III Zs.206: Show issues Location:
    Je nach Verfügbarkeit (siehe Angabe bei Bestand)
    bis Jg. 2021: Bestellungen von Artikeln über das Online-Bestellformular
    ab Jg. 2022: Lesesaal (EG)

    Order via subito

    This service is chargeable due to the Delivery terms set by subito. Orders including an article and supplementary material will be classified as separate orders. In these cases, fees will be demanded for each order.

  2. Article ; Online: Neonatal encephalopathy and hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy: moving from controversy to consensus definitions and subclassification.

    Molloy, Eleanor J / Branagan, Aoife / Hurley, Tim / Quirke, Fiona / Devane, Declan / Taneri, Petek E / El-Dib, Mohamed / Bloomfield, Frank H / Maeso, Beccy / Pilon, Betsy / Bonifacio, Sonia L / Wusthoff, Courtney J / Chalak, Lina / Bearer, Cynthia / Murray, Deirdre M / Badawi, Nadia / Campbell, Suzann / Mulkey, Sarah / Gressens, Pierre /
    Ferriero, Donna M / de Vries, Linda S / Walker, Karen / Kay, Sarah / Boylan, Geraldine / Gale, Chris / Robertson, Nicola J / D'Alton, Mary / Gunn, Alistair / Nelson, Karin B

    Pediatric research

    2023  Volume 94, Issue 6, Page(s) 1860–1863

    MeSH term(s) Infant, Newborn ; Humans ; Hypoxia-Ischemia, Brain/diagnosis ; Hypoxia-Ischemia, Brain/therapy ; Consensus ; Infant, Newborn, Diseases/diagnosis ; Infant, Newborn, Diseases/therapy
    Language English
    Publishing date 2023-08-12
    Publishing country United States
    Document type Editorial
    ZDB-ID 4411-8
    ISSN 1530-0447 ; 0031-3998
    ISSN (online) 1530-0447
    ISSN 0031-3998
    DOI 10.1038/s41390-023-02775-z
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    Full text online

    More links

    Kategorien

    In stock of ZB MED Cologne/Königswinter

    Zs.A 564: Show issues Location:
    Je nach Verfügbarkeit (siehe Angabe bei Bestand)
    bis Jg. 1994: Bestellungen von Artikeln über das Online-Bestellformular
    Jg. 1995 - 2021: Lesesall (1.OG)
    ab Jg. 2022: Lesesaal (EG)
    Zs.MO 373: Show issues

    Order via subito

    This service is chargeable due to the Delivery terms set by subito. Orders including an article and supplementary material will be classified as separate orders. In these cases, fees will be demanded for each order.

  3. Article ; Online: What are the most important unanswered research questions on rapid review methodology? A James Lind Alliance research methodology Priority Setting Partnership: the Priority III study protocol.

    Beecher, Claire / Toomey, Elaine / Maeso, Beccy / Whiting, Caroline / Stewart, Derek C / Worrall, Andrew / Elliott, Jim / Smith, Maureen / Tierney, Theresa / Blackwood, Bronagh / Maguire, Teresa / Kampman, Melissa / Ling, Benny / Gravel, Christopher / Gill, Catherine / Healy, Patricia / Houghton, Catherine / Booth, Andrew / Garritty, Chantelle /
    Thomas, James / Tricco, Andrea C / Burke, Nikita N / Keenan, Ciara / Westmore, Matthew / Devane, Declan

    HRB open research

    2021  Volume 4, Page(s) 80

    Abstract: Background: ...

    Abstract Background:
    Language English
    Publishing date 2021-11-18
    Publishing country Ireland
    Document type Journal Article
    ISSN 2515-4826
    ISSN (online) 2515-4826
    DOI 10.12688/hrbopenres.13321.2
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

    Order via subito

    This service is chargeable due to the Delivery terms set by subito. Orders including an article and supplementary material will be classified as separate orders. In these cases, fees will be demanded for each order.

    Inter-library loan at ZB MED

    Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

  4. Article ; Online: What are the most important unanswered research questions in trial retention? A James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership: the PRioRiTy II (Prioritising Retention in Randomised Trials) study.

    Brunsdon, Dan / Biesty, Linda / Brocklehurst, Peter / Brueton, Valerie / Devane, Declan / Elliott, Jim / Galvin, Sandra / Gamble, Carrol / Gardner, Heidi / Healy, Patricia / Hood, Kerenza / Jordan, Joan / Lanz, Doris / Maeso, Beccy / Roberts, Amanda / Skene, Imogen / Soulsby, Irene / Stewart, Derek / Torgerson, David /
    Treweek, Shaun / Whiting, Caroline / Wren, Sharon / Worrall, Andrew / Gillies, Katie

    Trials

    2019  Volume 20, Issue 1, Page(s) 593

    Abstract: Background: One of the top three research priorities for the UK clinical trial community is to address the gap in evidence-based approaches to improving participant retention in randomised trials. Despite this, there is little evidence supporting ... ...

    Abstract Background: One of the top three research priorities for the UK clinical trial community is to address the gap in evidence-based approaches to improving participant retention in randomised trials. Despite this, there is little evidence supporting methods to improve retention. This paper reports the PRioRiTy II project, a Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) that identified and prioritised unanswered questions and uncertainties around trial retention in collaboration with key stakeholders.
    Methods: This PSP was conducted in collaboration with the James Lind Alliance, a non-profit making initiative, to support key stakeholders (researchers, patients, and the public) in jointly identifying and agreeing on priority research questions. There were three stages. (1) First an initial online survey was conducted consisting of six open-ended questions about retention in randomised trials. Responses were coded into thematic groups to create a longlist of questions. The longlist of questions was checked against existing evidence to ensure that they had not been answered by existing research. (2) An interim stage involved a further online survey where stakeholders were asked to select questions of key importance from the longlist. (3) A face-to-face consensus meeting was held, where key stakeholder representatives agreed on an ordered list of 21 unanswered research questions for methods of improving retention in randomised trials.
    Results: A total of 456 respondents yielded 2431 answers to six open-ended questions, from which 372 questions specifically about retention were identified. Further analysis included thematically grouping all data items within answers and merging questions in consultation with the Steering Group. This produced 27 questions for further rating during the interim survey. The top 21 questions from the interim online survey were brought to a face-to-face consensus meeting in which key stakeholder representatives prioritised the order. The 'Top 10' of these are reported in this paper. The number one ranked question was 'What motivates a participant's decision to complete a clinical trial?' The entire list will be available at www.priorityresearch.ie .
    Conclusion: The Top 10 list can inform the direction of future research on trial methods and be used by funders to guide projects aiming to address and improve retention in randomised trials.
    MeSH term(s) Consensus ; Cooperative Behavior ; Evidence-Based Medicine ; Health Priorities ; Humans ; Interdisciplinary Communication ; Patient Dropouts ; Patient Selection ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods ; Research Design ; Stakeholder Participation ; United Kingdom
    Language English
    Publishing date 2019-10-15
    Publishing country England
    Document type Consensus Development Conference ; Journal Article ; Systematic Review
    ZDB-ID 2040523-6
    ISSN 1745-6215 ; 1468-6694 ; 1745-6215
    ISSN (online) 1745-6215
    ISSN 1468-6694 ; 1745-6215
    DOI 10.1186/s13063-019-3687-7
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

    Order via subito

    This service is chargeable due to the Delivery terms set by subito. Orders including an article and supplementary material will be classified as separate orders. In these cases, fees will be demanded for each order.

  5. Article ; Online: Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership - the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study.

    Healy, Patricia / Galvin, Sandra / Williamson, Paula R / Treweek, Shaun / Whiting, Caroline / Maeso, Beccy / Bray, Christopher / Brocklehurst, Peter / Moloney, Mary Clarke / Douiri, Abdel / Gamble, Carrol / Gardner, Heidi R / Mitchell, Derick / Stewart, Derek / Jordan, Joan / O'Donnell, Martin / Clarke, Mike / Pavitt, Sue H / Guegan, Eleanor Woodford /
    Blatch-Jones, Amanda / Smith, Valerie / Reay, Hannah / Devane, Declan

    Trials

    2018  Volume 19, Issue 1, Page(s) 147

    Abstract: Background: Despite the problem of inadequate recruitment to randomised trials, there is little evidence to guide researchers on decisions about how people are effectively recruited to take part in trials. The PRioRiTy study aimed to identify and ... ...

    Abstract Background: Despite the problem of inadequate recruitment to randomised trials, there is little evidence to guide researchers on decisions about how people are effectively recruited to take part in trials. The PRioRiTy study aimed to identify and prioritise important unanswered trial recruitment questions for research. The PRioRiTy study - Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) included members of the public approached to take part in a randomised trial or who have represented participants on randomised trial steering committees, health professionals and research staff with experience of recruiting to randomised trials, people who have designed, conducted, analysed or reported on randomised trials and people with experience of randomised trials methodology.
    Methods: This partnership was aided by the James Lind Alliance and involved eight stages: (i) identifying a unique, relevant prioritisation area within trial methodology; (ii) establishing a steering group (iii) identifying and engaging with partners and stakeholders; (iv) formulating an initial list of uncertainties; (v) collating the uncertainties into research questions; (vi) confirming that the questions for research are a current recruitment challenge; (vii) shortlisting questions and (viii) final prioritisation through a face-to-face workshop.
    Results: A total of 790 survey respondents yielded 1693 open-text answers to 6 questions, from which 1880 potential questions for research were identified. After merging duplicates, the number of questions was reduced to 496. Questions were combined further, and those that were submitted by fewer than 15 people and/or fewer than 6 of the 7 stakeholder groups were excluded from the next round of prioritisation resulting in 31 unique questions for research. All 31 questions were confirmed as being unanswered after checking relevant, up-to-date research evidence. The 10 highest priority questions were ranked at a face-to-face workshop. The number 1 ranked question was "How can randomised trials become part of routine care and best utilise current clinical care pathways?" The top 10 research questions can be viewed at www.priorityresearch.ie .
    Conclusion: The prioritised questions call for a collective focus on normalising trials as part of clinical care, enhancing communication, addressing barriers, enablers and motivators around participation and exploring greater public involvement in the research process.
    MeSH term(s) Communication ; Consensus ; Cooperative Behavior ; Health Priorities ; Humans ; Patient Selection ; Public Opinion ; Public-Private Sector Partnerships ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/methods ; Research Personnel/psychology ; Research Subjects/psychology ; Sample Size ; Stakeholder Participation ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Uncertainty
    Language English
    Publishing date 2018-03-01
    Publishing country England
    Document type Consensus Development Conference ; Journal Article
    ZDB-ID 2040523-6
    ISSN 1745-6215 ; 1468-6694 ; 1468-6708
    ISSN (online) 1745-6215 ; 1468-6694
    ISSN 1468-6708
    DOI 10.1186/s13063-018-2544-4
    Database MEDical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System OnLINE

    More links

    Kategorien

    Order via subito

    This service is chargeable due to the Delivery terms set by subito. Orders including an article and supplementary material will be classified as separate orders. In these cases, fees will be demanded for each order.

To top