| |
| |
| Foreword to the First Edition | |
| |
| |
| |
| Preface to the First Edition: do you need to read this book? | |
| |
| |
| Preface to the Fourth Edition | |
| |
| |
| Acknowledgements | |
| |
| |
| |
| Why read papers at all? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Does 'evidence-based medicine' simply mean 'reading papers in medical journals'? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Why do people sometimes groan when you mention EBM? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Before you start: formulate the problem | |
| |
| |
| |
| Searching the literature | |
| |
| |
| |
| What are you looking for? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Levels upon levels of evidence | |
| |
| |
| |
| Synthesised sources: systems, summaries and syntheses | |
| |
| |
| |
| Pre-appraised sources: synopses of systematic reviews and primary studies | |
| |
| |
| |
| Specialised resources | |
| |
| |
| |
| Primary studies - tackling the jungle | |
| |
| |
| |
| One-stop shopping: federated search engines | |
| |
| |
| |
| Asking for help and asking around | |
| |
| |
| |
| Getting your bearings - what is this paper about? | |
| |
| |
| |
| The science of 'trashing' papers | |
| |
| |
| |
| Three preliminary question to get your bearings | |
| |
| |
| |
| Randomised controlled trials | |
| |
| |
| |
| Cohort studies | |
| |
| |
| |
| Case-control studies | |
| |
| |
| |
| Cross-sectional surveys | |
| |
| |
| |
| Case reports | |
| |
| |
| |
| The traditional hierarchy of evidence | |
| |
| |
| |
| A note on ethical considerations | |
| |
| |
| |
| Assessing methodological quality | |
| |
| |
| |
| Was the study original? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Whom is the study about? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Was the design of the study sensible? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Was systematic bias avoided or minimised? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Was assessment 'blind'? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Were preliminary statistical questions addressed? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Summing up | |
| |
| |
| |
| Statistics for the non-statistician | |
| |
| |
| |
| How can non-statisticians evaluate statistical tests? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Have the authors set the scene correctly? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Paired data, tails, and outliers | |
| |
| |
| |
| Correlation, regression and causation | |
| |
| |
| |
| Probability and confidence | |
| |
| |
| |
| The bottom line | |
| |
| |
| |
| Summary | |
| |
| |
| |
| Papers that report trials of drug treatments and other simple interventions | |
| |
| |
| |
| 'Evidence' and marketing | |
| |
| |
| |
| Making decisions about therapy | |
| |
| |
| |
| Surrogate endpoints | |
| |
| |
| |
| What information to expect in a paper describing an RCT: the CONSORT statement | |
| |
| |
| |
| Getting worthwhile evidence out of a pharmaceutical representative | |
| |
| |
| |
| Papers that report trials of complex interventions | |
| |
| |
| |
| Complex interventions | |
| |
| |
| |
| Ten questions to ask about a paper describing a complex intervention | |
| |
| |
| |
| Papers that report diagnostic or screening tests | |
| |
| |
| |
| Ten men in the dock | |
| |
| |
| |
| Validating diagnostic tests against a gold standard | |
| |
| |
| |
| Ten questions to ask about a paper that claims to validate a diagnostic or screening test | |
| |
| |
| |
| Likelihood ratios | |
| |
| |
| |
| Clinical prediction rules | |
| |
| |
| |
| Papers that summarise other papers (systematic reviews and meta-analyses) | |
| |
| |
| |
| When is a review systematic? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Evaluating systematic reviews | |
| |
| |
| |
| Meta-analysis for the non-statistician | |
| |
| |
| |
| Explaining heterogeneity | |
| |
| |
| |
| New approaches to systematic review | |
| |
| |
| |
| Papers that tell you what to do (guidelines) | |
| |
| |
| |
| The great guidelines debate | |
| |
| |
| |
| How can we help ensure that evidence-based guidelines are followed? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Ten questions to ask about a clinical guideline | |
| |
| |
| |
| Papers that tell you what things cost (economic analyses) | |
| |
| |
| |
| What is an economic analysis? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Measuring the costs and benefits of health interventions | |
| |
| |
| |
| Ten questions to ask about an economic analysis | |
| |
| |
| |
| Conclusion | |
| |
| |
| |
| Papers that go beyond numbers (qualitative research) | |
| |
| |
| |
| What is qualitative research? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Evaluating papers that describe qualitative research | |
| |
| |
| |
| Conclusion | |
| |
| |
| |
| Papers that report questionnaire research | |
| |
| |
| |
| The rise and rise of questionnaire research | |
| |
| |
| |
| Ten questions to ask about a paper describing a questionnaire study | |
| |
| |
| |
| Papers that report quality improvement case studies | |
| |
| |
| |
| What are quality improvement studies - and how should we research them? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Ten questions to ask about a paper describing a quality improvement initiative | |
| |
| |
| |
| Conclusion | |
| |
| |
| |
| Getting evidence into practice | |
| |
| |
| |
| Why are health professionals slow to adopt evidence-based practice? | |
| |
| |
| |
| How much avoidable suffering is caused by failing to implement evidence? | |
| |
| |
| |
| How can we influence health professionals' behaviour to promote evidence-based practice? | |
| |
| |
| |
| What does an 'evidence-based organisation' look like? | |
| |
| |
| |
| How can we help organisations develop the appropriate structures, systems and values to support evidence-based practice? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Why is it so hard to get evidence into policymaking? | |
| |
| |
| |
| Checklists for finding, appraising and implementing evidence | |
| |
| |
| |
| Assessing the effects of an intervention | |
| |
| |
| Index | |